I am looking for input on a thesis I am writing the topic is "the morality of profit"?

[Vindicated Vigilante]

If you could write a paragraph or 2 on your thoughts toward the premise of "morality of profit" I would appreciate it... Some questions to think about might be...


•Are markets moral?
•Is profit a means, or an end?
•What is the relationship between greed and profit?
•Can the pursuit of profit be understood as a good in itself or a necessary evil?
•What are our core ethical responsibilities as we seek profits?
•What are the implications of the morality of profit to the cause of international development, and enterprise solutions to poverty?

[Sparkles]

Nonmaleficence.....do no harm

[thankfuldaughter572]

Read Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal. Ayn Rand. Just what you're looking for.

Pay me $1000 and I'll do your homework.

[Uncle Remus 54]

That to me is a great thesis to explore. I would preface my answer in my personal belief about what Jesus said is the greatest commandment. To love God with all our heart,mind, soul and body. And to love others as ourselves. Even to treat others as we want them to treat us. For on that premise stands the Mosaic law and it is true for Christians to follow as well. I believe this is why the founding fathers of America had in mind as well since they did practice a form of communism in Jamestown but found it of no benefit. People who get the same and did nothing to contribute towards that got the same reward as those who worked hard but had to give it away to those who did not work for it. Such is communism.

Another cautionary note is this. One has to choose to think if the question is true or false and accept or reject it's premise.

Markets are moral if everyone contributes equally to it as a whole. There is no relationship between greed and profit since gain is a reflection of how valuable it contributes to society as a whole. If ones product is not doing well find another one that will. The ethics of profits is in accountability between the buyer and seller with a good quality product for a low cost. When operating at the least level of human interaction with integrity and honesty and trust. And this is a reflection of the whole of society then all of the big decisions whether private or of a corporate nature can be relied upon. Since all of this work between all parties is beneficial to society as a whole. By doing so there is more choice as to how spend profit. Even as Jesus said the poor you will have always. Even to take care of those who are poor.

If I were to add to this. Jesus taught the parable of the talents. Where each person started out with the same amount of money. The person who hid it and was selfish that was taken away. It was given instead to the one who did the most with his money. God is love and love is a creation. By doing more with one started out with the reward for hard work is seen. Not so that the prosperous one will lavish himself. But more so that he can benefit others as well.

Just some thoughts on this. Later.

[Luke]

I usually don't give links to pages for answers, but this speech made by the fictional character Francisco D' Anconia in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged will be sure to get you thinking about this subject. Even if you don't agree there are many points that you might have to write against. I'll provide some copy and pasting, but I recommend you read the speech here: http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1826

The speech is pretty short given the massive topic it covers. The topic of the speech is "Money", but the philosophy behind money is explained (which covers profit and production).






"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears not all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor--your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?

"Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions--and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

"But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made--before it can be looted or mooched--made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.'

"To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss--the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery--that you must offer them values, not wounds--that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men's stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find. And when men live by trade--with reason, not force, as their final arbiter--it is the best product that wins, the best performance, the man of best judgment and highest ability--and the degree of a man's productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?

[Mr. JackPax]

Read a little Ayn Rand. As much as people hate her, her works probably answer your questions in an idealistic sort of way.

[happyoatmeal642]

We all recommend Ayn Rand because she was the only philosopher to defend capitalism on the grounds that it was man's right, first to practice it as the only economic means that allowed him the individual sovereignty, one of Jefferson's "unalienable rights", that was his by virtue of "Nature and of nature's god,";

but also on the basis that it was only natural economic system that allowed man the right to the results of his gainful efforts.

Capitalism Magazine reprinted Francisco's speech, the most famous "money is NOT the root of all evil" speech ever presented. http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1826

And then there is the speech you are really looking for. It is pretty far down the page, and I didn't know if you would have the time to look for the tangible part, so I copied it.

It too comes from Atlas Shrugged. Hank Rearden, an American business tycoon, is on trial for making "too much profit." (Does that sound familiar, in this time of Obama's "pay czar"?)

"You speak as if you were fighting for some sort of principle, Mr. Rearden, but what you're actually fighting for is only your property, isn't it?"
"Yes, of course. I am fighting for my property. Do you know the kind of principle that represents?"
"You pose as a champion of freedom, but it's only the freedom to make money that you're after."
"Yes, of course. All I want is the freedom to make money. Do you know what that freedom implies?"
"Surely, Mr. Rearden, you wouldn't want your attitude to be misunderstood. You wouldn't want to give support to the widespread impression that you are a man devoid of social conscience, who feels no concern for the welfare of his fellows and works for nothing but his own profit."
"I work for nothing but my own profit. I earn it."
There was a gasp, not of indignation, but of astonishment, in the crowd behind him and silence from the judges he faced. He went on calmly:
"No, I do not want my attitude to be misunderstood. I shall be glad to state it for the record. I am in full agreement with the facts of everything said about me in the newspapers - with the facts, but not with the evaluation. I work for nothing but my own profit - which I make by selling a product they need to men who are willing and able to buy it. I do not produce it for their benefit at the expense of mine, and they do not buy it for my benefit at the expense of theirs; I do not sacrifice my interests to them nor do they sacrifice theirs to me; we deal as equals by mutual consent to mutual advantage - and I am proud of every penny that I have earned in this manner. I am rich and I am proud of every penny I own. I made my money by my own effort, in free exchange and through the voluntary consent of every man I dealt with - voluntary consent of those who employed me when I started, the voluntary consent of those who work for me now, the voluntary consent of those who buy my product. I shall answer all the questions you are afraid to ask me openly. Do I wish to pay my workers more than their services are worth to me? I do not. Do I wish to sell my product for less than my customers are willing to pay me? I do not. Do I wish to sell it at a loss or give it away? I do not. If this is evil, do whatever you please about me, according to whatever standards you hold. These are mine. I am earning my own living, as every honest man must. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact of my own existence and the fact that I must work in order to support it. I refuse to accept as guilt the fact that I am able to do it better than most people - the fact that my work is of greater value than the work of my neighbours and that more men are willing to pay me. I refuse to apologise for my ability - I refuse to apologise for my success - I refuse to apologise for my money. If this is evil, make the most of it. If this is what the public finds harmful to its interests, let the public destroy me. This is my code - and I will accept no other. I could say to you that I have done more good for my fellow men than you can ever hope to accomplish - but I will not say it, because I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognise the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life. I will not say that the good of others was the purpose of my work - my own good was my purpose, and I despise the man who surrenders his. I could say to you that you do not serve the public good - that nobody's good can be achieved at the price of human sacrifices - that when you violate the rights of one man, you have violated the right of all, and a public of rightless creatures is doomed to destruction. I could say to you that you will and can achieve nothing but universal devastation - as any looter must, when he runs out of victims. I could say it, but I won't. It is not your particular policy that I challenge, but your moral premise. If it were true that men could achieve their good by means of turning some men into sacrificial animals, and I were asked to immolate myself for the sake of creatures who wanted to survive at the price of my blood, if I were asked to serve the interests of society apart from, above and against my own - I would refuse. I would reject it as the most contemptible evil, I would fight it with every power I possess, I would fight the whole of mankind, if one minute were all I could last before I were murdered, I would fight in the full confidence of the justice of my battle and of a living being's right to exist. Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!"

The crowd burst into applause.

Rearden whirled around, more startled than his judges. He saw face that laughed in violent excitement, and faces that pleaded for help; he saw their silent despair breaking out into the open; he saw the same anger and indignation as his own, finding release in the wild defiance of their cheering; he saw the looks of admiration and the looks of hope. There were also the face of loose-mouthed young men and maliciously unkempt females, the kind who led the booing in newsreel theatres at any appearance of a businessman of the screen; they did not attempt a counter-demonstration; they were silent.
http://bheemboy.blogspot.com/2007/12/han...trial.html