We all know the argument that profit motive is part of human nature is false. Yet I’m still not sure why capital owners pursue profits. Is it the difference of self-interest vs collective interest? If so then wouldn’t that enforce the argument on human nature? Or am I missing a crucial aspect of the Capitalist system? I’m genuinely wondering.
Edit: Sorry for not being able to answer all of the comments, the blocklist of my instance sadly won’t let me see all of the comments.
A business might need profit for its sustainability and expansion, but a problem with that comes about when we question: to what extent is the expansion justifiable and ethical?
For me, there is no way ethical justification other than to avoid to collapse of the business so that the workers don’t lose their jobs. However, profits in a Capitalist system may be well justified by the capital owners as they are often used to stay competitive. But then again the whole system is entirely unethical and unjustifiable.
yes, and profits arent entirely unethical if we take other types of business politics in consideration. Let’s say its a co-op business and they provide their service so well that more parts of society demands service. in that sense that may desire profit to pay for such an expansion while still being more ethical than its capitalist counterpart
@altair222 @hamborgr um it seems that youve got the socialist definition of profits a bit mixed up. profits are the extracted surplus value of labor to benefit the capitalist. the earnings of a cooperative no longer counts as profit by a socialist definition
maybe but in my exposition i believe i was trying to make the same kind of distinction
I agree completely, but as it stands co-ops are currently a very small minority in a market immensely dominated by private capital owners.