When money is all that matters...

As I read a little more indepth about "Tripple Bottom Line" (TBL), the arguments seem very compelling indeed for organizations to focus not just on economic, but also social and ecological bottom lines. Here in lies the caveat, does social and ecology matters in reality?

It is not uncommon to hear CEOs professing that "people are their greatest asset" and that their organizations operate in a manner that is environmentally friendly. Inspiring words and noble indeed. But the next moment they talk of profitability as key imperatives, and all other things gets subordinated. I am not saying this is right or wrong, but I am curious about how and why organizations or human in general (including me of course) easily and automatically succumb to economic lure more than anything else? Blame it on history? Whoever invented "trade" has perhaps designed "greed" unknowingly.

In recent times, the NKF saga has caused us to fundamentally challenge the existence of true altruism. What is most disturbing to me wasn't limited to the context of NKF, but rather it is the growth of a cynical perspective on what I would call economic altruism. Which means altruism for the sake of money.

I'm a buddhist, and for a long time have taken for granted the noble causes of renounced buddhist disciples (i.e. monks and nuns). Everybody needs to eat and sleep, I can fully understand this. But ever since the NKF incident, I cannot understand why a monk need more than 10K a month for living in renunciation while many others get by comfortably with 1K or less? Is renunciation becoming a career aspiration like pastors in churches? I hold the highest regard for all religious and spiritual teachings, but this money issue is one that I cannot comtemplate and find it hard to reconcile. If one uses the name of religion for personal benefit and is taken as acceptable, then this world needs some serious soul searching. No benefitting in the name of religion, please!

Despite being one of the smallest country in the world, some believe that our leaders need to be highest paid. The arguments in favour of this proposition are certainly compelling, but when one is bent on doing something there will always be more reasons in favour than against. The underlying motivation for political office is money? Yes?

Bill Gates has certainly made the world fall on his feet with his recent philantrophic moves, but I wonder why there is a need for such elaborate media coverage if the underlying motivation is truly charitable. Don't get me wrong, his generosity has certainly benefitted many around the world and should be applauded. To the extent that anyone who knows Bill knows his charitable cause. For fame? And fame for?

Even the most fundamental and primitive of human activity gets entangled with the dollar like never before. Baby bonus... sounds familiar? My mum used to lament that she got "summon" by KK hospital when I was born (3rd child), but now we can make a living out of procreation through baby bonus schemes. Isn't having children innate in human (or living things)? Do we really need money as motivators? Won't we find our kids a drag once we used up the bonus? Come on!

The more I think of it, the more I feel like I am becoming a capitalist critique and socialist proponent. Quite scary... what's that theory by Karl Marx?