Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> >Yet, if you look at almost all accounting reports, the only
>>focus is "profit" in the shortest measured period of 1 quarter.
>>This is the only language and religion of Wall Street.
>
> The other thing that bugs me is that the focus seems to be on maximising
> profit at the expense of everything else, rather than making "sufficient
> profit" to give investors a return, as well as generally allowing the 
> local
> workers and environment sufficient income and protection.

What if maximizing profit was NOT "at the expense of everything else", would 
you accept the idea?

> Companies have done this in the past - examples like Cadburys who built 
> the
> Bourneville village for the factory workers. Other examples exist as well, 
> I
> am sure.

As a worker, I would not want the company to decide where I must live. It 
costs money to build the buildings, why don't you just give me the money, 
and let me buy a house where I choose to buy it? There are other benefits 
which the village provided that were not equally valuable to all employees, 
which means they have resulted in economic loss. In that respect, I like 
Henry Ford's approach better -- pay the worker a high salary so he would be 
able to buy the automobile he's helped build (or spend the money on 
something else).

Economic freedom is very close in my mind to personal freedom.

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist