Why is abortion such an issue in the USA?

[Professor]

[The Dharma Bum]

[The Dharma Bum]

Many elements of modern society already transcend the taking of profit.

Are non-profit organizations a successful business model? I think they are. Ostensibly the USG is supposed to be neutral as private actors compete on an even field, unfortunately the reality is somewhat different. Simply eliminating corruption, cronyism, etc would make a world of difference.

And reigning in the excesses of private corporations would make a profound difference in our society.

We are talking about choosing rational policy suitable for the long term instead of accepting policy specifically designed to disregard anything that gets in the way of making a quick buck.

In other words, as a collective our behavior if applied as if on an individual is analogous to that of a shiftless opportunist rather than someone who plans for the future.

Therefore saying that "utopia doesn't work" is analogous to telling your children planning for the future is stupid because you never know what will happen so you might as well be greedy and get away with anything you can now.

[exploited]

The profit motive is an interesting concept, because it really is a giant misdirection. People think that other people are motivated by money, but for the vast bulk of humanity, that just isn't true. The accumulation of numbers on a ledger is of no value - what matters is the goods and resources that money buys.

So the real issue is what system allows the most people to have the most access to goods and resources. And in that regard, non-profits are clearly superior, because money (read: resources) is not gobbled up by owners. When you think about it, it is actually pretty insane that we choose a system that produces such great inequalities while also being less efficient at delivering what we really want (goods and services).

Take something as simple as toothpaste. It is worth billions and provides a great deal of benefit to societies and individuals. Literally everybody needs and wants toothpaste (except the British HAR HAR), and yet we pay ridiculous amounts of money to get it. It is a product that is sold to us for a crazy markup, on the grounds that people won't make it unless they make money... Which is categorically untrue, as no one likes a toothache. So the smart thing to do would be to form a cooperative that produces toothpaste, pays employees a reasonable, living wage, and then redirects all excess money into decreasing the price of toothpaste. Literally everyone wins in this scenario - bosses make more money due to greater responsibility, employees make money due to having a job, consumers spend less money because it isn't going to shareholders, and so on.

This is far more rational than all of us paying $2.00 for a tube of toothpaste that costs $0.04 to make. The incentive is already built in - we all get toothpaste, which means our teeth don't rot. This should be enough, and yet it is apparently not.

Why is that? Is it perhaps because we have been tricked into thinking that humanity doesn't pursue innovation inherently? I believe it is. The idea that humanity won't make new things, won't pursue technological advancement, won't compete to see who makes the best product without the profit motive is total bullshit. The incentive to do so is built into us as social animals.

[Professor]

[Professor]