What scares the f*ck out of you?

[tw]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Any one can be short-sighted...such short-sightedness doesn't negate the central role of profit in business.

Two choices. Either the purpose is its product. Or the purpose is product. Which one? Both cannot exist. History is irrefutable. Companies driven for profits make crap products. Examples apply to almost every corporation - profit, non-profit, NGO, SOE, etc.

Denying that without even one reason is disingenuous. Your every denial is "What I was told is true. Therefore it must be true." No reason was provided to contradict a reality. Productive companies - those that advance mankind - worry about the product. Cited again and again are corrupt or unproductive operations that exist because profits - not the product - are important. They are not exceptions. Same examples exist almost everywhere.

Appreciate that what one is taught as a child is extremely difficult to unlearn. Is also why brainwashing works; is so effective. But reality is obvious. Either a company works to advance mankind; has better products; and therefore reaps profits. Or a company exists to enrich the Central Committee of the Communist party - top management. Exists only for profits. Then invents excuses when even profits dry up. You are hard pressed to list exceptions which explains no examples - only denials.

[henry quirk]

What I know of business comes from running one (not from a book or a school).

I self-employ ('am' the business)...my experience of the world 'as is' trumps (for me) your (in my view) isolating idealism.

But: have it your way, tw...let me know how it works out in your own business.

[henry quirk]

"Productive companies - those that advance mankind - worry about the product."

Of course they do!

I've said the same multiple times, in multiple ways, in this thread.

Why, do they worry about the product, tw?

Because, in selling a better, or superior, product, the wise business owner hopes to make MORE PROFIT.

If more profit were not possible, the owner would NOT improve the product or seek to offer quality.

Why the hell would he?

[tw]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Because, in selling a better, or superior, product, the wise business owner hopes to make MORE PROFIT.

Not always true. Especially not true with NGOs and other non-profits. All (honest and needed) businesses have in common is what makes them productive. They must decide which one to address. Either better products or better profits. One cannot maximize both.

Productive companies that address their products can have a reward - profits. I keep posting this and you keep ignoring it. In part because it contradicts what business schools indoctrinate. Profit is only a reward. A reward can also exist in other forms. But one must decide to maximize profits (the reward) or the product. Most things done to maximize profits create inferior products. One cannot do both. As demonstrated in examples that were apparently too long; created glazed over eyes.

In every example, companies failed because they wanted to the profits. Innovation dies. Cost controls further destroy products to increase profits. Top management is replaced by profit experts who do not even know how to use the product. This happens when naive MBA types assume profits mean a better product must exist. You have absolutely no reason to assume that.

One must make a choice. Either maximize a product or maximize profits. Balmer so tried to maximize profits as to obviously harm Microsot's products. That is not an exception. It is a rule so reliable that you still fail to provide even one example ton contradict it.

Why do you never post an example? To make the point, you must keep ignoring what was posted. Understand the major difference between a 'purpose' and a 'reward'. Difference is major. It explains why companies that maximized profits end up with inferior products, adversarial employees, and threats of bankruptcy. Every failed company tried to maximize profits; therefore had to ignore the product. Concepts such as cost controls exist in dying companies maximizing profits while ignoring its products. The want the reward without earning it.

[henry quirk]

"I keep posting this and you keep ignoring it."

No sir...in my own way: I've addressed all your points...that you don't like (or, understand) what I'm posting is not my concern.

You are right about this, though: "I keep posting". Yes, you do...the same things over and over and over, just as I keep posting the same things over and over and over.

I've convinced you of nuthin'; you've convinced me of nuthin' and 'round and 'round we go.

When I was young: merry go 'rounds were fun; as an older man: not so much.

So: as I say, tw, 'have it your way' (that is, believe as you like, as will I).

[tw]

[quote=henry quirk;925477No sir...in my own way: I've addressed all your points...that you don't like (or, understand) what I'm posting is not my concern.[/QUOTE] Sir. You clearly have not. Because you cannot. To have addressed each point means reasons why (not rhetoric). And you provided examples. You did neither because you cannot.

You said the purpose of a business is profits because profits are the purpose of a business. That is classic Tea Party reasoning - also called rhetoric. When challenged to post examples, you posted none. Not even one. Otherwise the fallacies in that rhetoric are exposed. Your reasoning is disingenuous. But classic of how radical and extremist opinions are defended.

Purpose of a business is either its profits or its products. Which one? Difference between purpose and reward is fundamental. You ignore both to remain entrenched in rhetoric. Same logic also proved increased health by smoking cigarettes. A naive consumer automatically believes only what he is told. And then becomes entrenched when reality and logic expose the myth. You even ignore businesses such as NGOs, SOE, and non-profits. Otherwise you might learn how easily you were deceived by sound byte rhetoric.

No way around exceptions that you ignore. Now way around the examples you cannot provide. No way around disingenuous reasoning that Limbaugh also uses to defect glaring contradictions.

Purpose of a productive business is its products. That will not change no matter how many times rhetoric says otherwise and its examples are ignored. Product (not profits) made America (and other free market nations) great. Profits are simply one example of the reward - and not the purpose of all businesses. When the purpose of a business is profits, then words such as racketeering and mafia apply. More examples that expose fallacies in your rhetoric. Since the purpose of businesses (that are not corrupt) has always been their product.

What they contribute to the advancement of mankind.