Profits increase the value of the company.Where do the profits go? — Xtrix
An employee is not an owner, so should have no input in this. If you are an owner (you own any stock say), then you very much do have input in this, if only to vote for the guy you want making these sorts of decisions for you. The actual decisions are not made by the stockholders any more than laws are made by the average citizen.(1) You work at a company and help produce a product — whether a good or a service.
(4) Why should I have no input in deciding where the profits — that I helped generate — are allocated and how they’re distributed?
Yet this strikes me as an essential stepping stone to changing the anti-democratic, plutocratic way we currently structure our economic system. — Xtrix
An employee is not an owner, so should have no input in this. If you are an owner (you own any stock say), then you very much do have input in this, if only to vote for the guy you want making these sorts of decisions for you. The actual decisions are not made by the stockholders any more than laws are made by the average citizen. — noAxioms
I meant them both the way I said. The 'should' part is a statement of how things ought to be. The latter statement was one about how things (correctly) are.In the first half of this you use "should" and the next part use "are not". Which are you talking about, the way things are or the way things ought to be? — Isaac
I meant them both the way I said. The 'should' part is a statement of how things ought to be. The latter statement was one about how things (correctly) are — noAxioms
They wouldn't be profits if they did. They remain owned by the company, and said owners only get money in their pockets if they sell their portion of the company. Any money the CEO (and other employees) takes home is part of the cost of running a business, and is not profit.Obviously, profits go into the owners (and shareholders, CEOs) pockets. — Real Gone Cat
I suppose that depends on the moral standard under which the company operates, which is often set by the country in which it operates. It would likely destroy the company if the employees were allowed to just run off with any excess cash, but there is in most instances an involuntary tax on the profits which go to social programs which benefit everybody, not just the company, and not just their employees. This tax seems for the most part to serve the moral imperative which you suggest.I'm struggling to see the moral imperative for a non-owner to have no input deciding where the profits are allocated. — Isaac
I think that's gross profit. I mean, I worked for a software joint, so almost all the revenue was gross profit since it the cost of manufacturing is negligible. But the cost of R&D, facility overhead, maybe portions of acquisitions, new construction, dividends, etc. come off that. Profit is what's left.I thought the definition of profit was revenue - cost, when revenue > cost. — Real Gone Cat
One can argue either side of that point, but that's certainly the way it looks from the sweat-shop employee view. Still, the company wants to maximize said profits, and overcompensating a CEO is not going to do that, so there must be a reason they're willing to shell all that out to him.The CEO is unlike other "employees" in that they are over-compensated for their input. They pocket profit created by the labor of others.
Totally agree. The system as it is now seems to be designed to widen the gap between the haves and have-nots. I've found it to be an interesting exercise to attempt the design of a better way to go about it. 'Taint easy. Ditto with designing a government from scratch.Hey, I'm not against capitalism. But it should be tempered, via regulation if necessary.
Not my topic.The floor is yours, sir.
An employee is not an owner, so should have no input in this. — noAxioms
But it belongs to the company, which in turn belongs to the owners of the company. — noAxioms
The simplest way to change the undemocratic, plutocratic system is to take their property away from them without compensation. — Bitter Crank
What if we were a species who found working for another individual (or small group) anathema? — Real Gone Cat
Why is this simpler than having workers have a few board seats? I think that’s at least less extreme. — Xtrix
There's no easy way to convert the system from manufacture for profit to manufacture for need. — Bitter Crank
The simplest way to change the undemocratic, plutocratic system is to take their property away from them without compensation.
— Bitter Crank
Why is this simpler than having workers have a few board seats? I think that’s at least less extreme. — Xtrix
‘where do your personal earnings go?’. There is no ONE answer to this question. — I like sushi
I have a feeling there is a punchline to this OP? — I like sushi
(3) Where do the profits go?
In my experience having discussions with workers, this question is rarely asked. So it’s no surprise the following question is asked even less:
(4) Why should I have no input in deciding where the profits — that I helped generate — are allocated and how they’re distributed? — Xtrix
Part of the profits go into taxes. — god must be atheist
What Is Profit?
Profit describes the financial benefit realized when revenue generated from a business activity exceeds the expenses, costs, and taxes involved in sustaining the activity in question.
Any profits earned funnel back to business owners, who choose to either pocket the cash, distribute it to shareholders as dividends, or reinvest it back into the business.
The logic behind workers not being entitled to profit necessarily is that they might not have a very good idea what the interests of the firm are. Managers are managers for a reason. Not everyone can read a balance sheet or revenue report competently. — Count Timothy von Icarus
The other reason is that they have much less risk than the owner(s). If the form closes from misuse of profits, they might lose their job, but they won't be dealing with all the debts for the firm. — Count Timothy von Icarus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.