What scares the f*ck out of you?

[sexobon]

INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS 'Profit'

Profit is the money a business makes after accounting for all the expenses. Regardless of whether the business is a couple of kids running a lemonade stand or a publicly traded multinational company, consistently earning profit is every company's goal.

The path toward profitability can be long. For example, online bookseller Amazon.com was founded in 1994 and did not produce its first annual profit until 2003. Many start ups and new businesses fail when the owners run out of capital to sustain the business.

Originally Posted by henry quirk

... The only purpose of a business (what 'it' does) is to make a profit for the owners of the business. ...

This is correct. Revenues realized in excess of expenses and sustaining a business's status quo are profit. The purpose of a business is profit. The goals of those who reap the profit may be reinvestment into the business to grow, diversify, conduct R&D to create new marketable goods and services; or, doing pro bono charitable work, wielding influence ... etc. Businesses, rather than personal fortunes, may be established to achieve those goals; but, goals can change - the purpose of a business does not.

Some businesses may take longer than others make a profit. Positioning a business for sustainability may take more time than simply meeting expenses. That does not; however, mean that the purpose of the business isn't profit, just that it hasn't fulfilled its purpose yet. Even a subsidiary business operating in the red as a tax deduction for the parent organization exists for the purpose of overall profit just as business charitable contributions sometimes do.

Counterpoints suggesting that revenues beyond expenses aren't profit when they're reinvested into a business would have to demonstrate that those revenues were limited to just sustainment requirements and not growth. Then it would mean only that the business isn't profitable now, that its purpose isn't yet fulfilled. NPOs are beyond the scope of the initial contention and rebuttal as are definitions of "profit" derived from jargon relative to specific disciplines.

LLAP

[tw]

Originally Posted by sexobon

The purpose of a business is profit.

So the purpose of non-profit businesses must be to subvert or harm an economy. Clearly Amazon is doing major damage to America.

Purposes of all businesses are similar. Each may be measured by different parameters. Only corrupt operations that exist only for profit (ie mafia) harm an economy and society. Selectively ignoring those other businesses is disingenuous. The purpose of all businesses is ....

[henry quirk]

Not seein' how havin' profit as the goal equates with damaging the economy.

Joe, for example, wants to make profit (money above and beyond what he invests in his business for development, production, marketing, etc.).

Joe decides he'll develop, produce, and market X.

If Joe is successful in offering sumthin' folks want (or, are convinced they want) then Joe stands to make a profit. But: if he offers sumthin' folks don't want then no profit for Joe.

Now, if folks want crap (or, can be convinced they want crap) then that's on them...after all: no one is obligated to buy jack from any one.

So: if the economy (nuthin' but transactions) tanks, blame the market (actual and potential customers), not the source of product and service.

Buyer (don't trust, don't settle): beware.

Again: the only purpose for business is to make a profit through the sale of products and services that folks want (or, have been convinced - by way of marketing - that they want).

[henry quirk]

Non-profits - again - by definition, fall outside of profit-making endeavors.

Nuthin' to be gained (by you) in muddyin' the waters of this discussion through equating 'for profit' with 'non-profit'.

[henry quirk]

There's only one meaningful measure to the owners of a business, that being how much profit is there (and [to continue making profit] are we liable to continue producing that which customers want [or, that we can convince them they want]?).

[henry quirk]

For profit: fishin' cuz you and your family gotta eat.

Non profit: fishin' for fun and throwin' your catch back.

The methods may be the same but the goals are not.

[tw]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

For profit: fishin' cuz you and your family gotta eat.

For profit: I take far more fish than my family needs. Non-profit: I take only what I need.

Businesses are profit and non-profit. To justify a business school lie, some must pretend one is a business and the other is not.

All businesses have one purpose - superior products/servcies that advance society. Any business without that purpoes (ie the mafia) is harmful to that society. Businesses that are productive (profit and non-profit and NPOs) accomplish same. In every case their 'profits' are measured by different metrics. But they are all businesses that exist for a common purpose.

Junk science reasoning conveniently ignores one example to justify a half truth or myth. And so some want to ignore non-profit business since it contradicts what they were original ordered to believe. Every business - profit or non-profit - is a business. All productive business have the same fundamental purpose - advancement of mankind. Those that do not advance mankind are 'fixed' by concepts such as bankruptcy. Or (ie mafia) by legal prosecution. We make laws so that only productive businesses survive.

Any business that discriminates based in their religion and hate violates principles that America was founded on. Early 20th Century racists also wanted to deny those basic American principles. Similar people are also described by other names such as ISIS and Likud.

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by tw

So the purpose of non-profit businesses must be to subvert or harm an economy. Clearly Amazon is doing major damage to America. ...

I don't see where anyone other than you is saying that, tw. Where you got that from I don't know; but, you've been known to put words into people's mouths just so you'll have something to dispute.

I've already posted that NPOs are outside the context of the original contention and rebuttal. You're terminology, "non-profit businesses," is a futile attempt to expand the context of initial statements beyond what was there; but, you've been known to do that just so you'll have something to dispute ...

Nonprofit organization

A nonprofit organization (NPO, also known as a non-business entity[1]) is an organization that uses its surplus revenues to further achieve its purpose or mission, rather than distributing its surplus income to the organization's directors (or equivalents) as profit or dividends.

... and you've been known manipulate definitions of words used by others just so you'll have something to dispute.

You're kinda like the Rush Limbaugh of the Cellar.

[henry quirk]

Bypassing the religious and dscrimination crap...

Unless a life is threatened (in a real, demonstrable, way) by way of denying service or products, the owner of a business should be free to turn away a customer for any damned reason that comes to mind (including, no reason at all).

If the market (actual and potential customers) find the owner's action distasteful then the owner is punished by way of a loss of profit.

Legal/government involvement is not required.

[tw]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Unless a life is threatened (in a real, demonstrable, way) by way of denying service or products, the owner of a business should be free to turn away a customer for any damned reason that comes to mind (including, no reason at all).

You have justified denial of service to blacks at the Woolworth's counter. A company offers services to the public. That means no denial of service for color of skin, shape of a foot, color of eyes, size of fingers, disabilities, religion, etc. You have simply endorsed same wacko extremists logic promoted by the KKK.

Religion and racial discrimination is entirely about this concept. The minute you want to "bypass crap", then we know you want to ignore what is fundamental to America to justifiy a myopic opinion. All good men only impose their religion on themselves. And never on anyone else.

Another wacko extremists went to Florida to impose his religious beliefs on Terry Schiavo. Same thing by another corrupt religious pervert. Religion is only between you and your god. No one else. Not even your church has the right to impose their beliefs on your relationship. Even your church can only advise. It has no right to impose their beliefs on you.

Many so hate humanity (ie Netanyahu of Isreal) as to even use religious hate to get reelected. It works because so many adults are still children; would impose their religion, emotional biases, and hate on others. Businesses in a moral, ethical, honest, and American society have no right to impose their religous beliefs on anyone else.

Religion is only between you and your god. Nothing more.

If they want to deny service to anyone, then they have the right to deny service to all by not selling that product or service. They have the right to choose what they want to sell for legal and commercial reasons - to all or to none.

Once religion's beliefs are involved, well, my religion says it is good and I should hang them from the ceiling by their penis or clitoris. My religion openly advocates physcial harm to anyone who has pagon religious beliefs - such as Jews, Christians, and Muslims. Of course, being a patriotic American, I do not impose my religion (and my machette) on anyone else.

[henry quirk]

I've justified denial of services and products to blacks, whites, the old, the young, republicans, democrats, libertarians, atheists, christians, jews, muslims, the single, marrieds, the fat, the thin, the beautiful, the ugly, men, women, gay, straight, and on and on and on.

*I've justified denial of services and products by anyone, to anyone, for any reason at all.

This not about religion; it's about property (ownership and use).

Life is not fair...get used to it.




*except if a life is threatened (in a real, demonstrable, way) by a denial of service or product...gave an example up-thread

[henry quirk]

"All businesses have one purpose - superior products/servcies that advance society."

No. Businesses sell products and services to make profit.

Innovation is all about increasing profit.

That society possibly advances is the happy (but uneccessary) byproduct of businesses competing with other businesses (through improvements to services and products), attempting to lay claim to as big a slice of the market as possible.

'New and improved' is always about makin' dough.

Your idealism insulates you from reality.