When it comes to my opinion of greed, I believe that greed can be a good or bad thing. Everyone wants to get at least one or more thing that they don’t have, example, iphone, German cars, mansion. Majority of people are willing/doing everything in their power to get those things, that itself is greed. In his speech, Gordon Gekko says, Greed Is Good. But I think that there is a difference when it comes to greed and being better than others. Greed can be good because it gives people a goal, something for people to strive towards. I do not think that Kant would agree with Gekko because Kant believes you should do what is good for everyone, whereas greed only benefits yourself. Kant also wants all people to be even and fair, whereas greed makes some people better than others. I know it might sound weird but ethics and egoism go hand-in-hand. They have a lot more in common than the fact that they both have 6 letters and begin with the letter, “E.” When you think of ethics you likely think of people doing the right thing to make the world better and thinking generously of the needs of others. Yet, when you analyse why people make the ethical decisions that they do, more often than not, they are considering self-interest (that is, egoism). Self-interest motivates many of our behaviours…even our gracious and generous ones. People may donate money to a worthy charity to feel less guilty about not helping out more or perhaps to see their name on a donor’s publication list (or on the front of a building), or perhaps they just don’t want to argue with the person making the request. People might volunteer to help others in need (e.g., work at a soup kitchen) to earn community service credits for a course or to improve their resume. Frequently young people today engage in volunteer work in order to improve their odds at admission into a selective college or graduate program. People might behave in a generous manner to impress their family, friends, or a potential mate. Watch how men behave on a first date with children, animals, and those in need compared to how they might behave later in a relationship. If people want to behave ethically and do nice things for others for selfish reasons I say bring it on.Every person should have the same level of material goods and services and people are morally equal and that equality in material goods and services is the best way to give effect to this moral idea. We have construction of appropriate indices for measurement (the index problem) and the specification of time frames. One way of solving the index problem is to specify that everyone should have the same bundle of material goods and services rather than the same level (so everyone would have 4 oranges, 6 apples, 1 bike, etc.).The main objection to this solution is that it appears likely that there will be many other allocations of material goods and services which make some people better off without making anybody else worse off. For instance, someone who prefers apples to oranges will be better off if he/she swaps some of his/her oranges for some of the apples belonging to a person who prefers oranges. Specification of time frames identify and require that a particular pattern of distribution be achieved or at least aimed at .but they also need to specify when the pattern is required. All people should have the same wealth at some initial point, after which people are free to use their wealth in whatever way they choose, with the consequences that future outcomes are bound to be unequal. Most common form of equality principle specifies that income (measured in terms of money) should be equal in each time frames, though even this may lead to significant disparities in wealth if variations in savings are permitted. Comparable, both greed and egoism are things that cause human beings to forget respect for others and to violate rules that have been established for the sake of peace and friendship.