Could we have an entire economy...

[Strivax]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Just wondering...

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[durangodawood]

I'd say no. Because lots of people (tho certainly not all) want to make and keep profits from their enterprises.

I dont picture this changing. Do you?

 

[keith99]

Perhaps, but only well after automation and robotics have taken things to the point where all basic needs and a lot mare are taken case of without human effort.

I still do not see it happening. There is only so much real estate right on the beach where the climate makes the beach fun. How would it be decided who gets that real estate?

I can see actors doing theater for theater's sake. But who gets the good seats? And what keeps an actor in a small role with the company when there is little chance of a larger part within a reasonable time frame? Or even those with the big parts when personalities clash?

 

[Strivax]

I'd say no. Because lots of people (tho certainly not all) want to make and keep profits from their enterprises.

I dont picture this changing. Do you?

Yes, of course people want to get rich, if the culture is such that it most values wealth and mistakes it for virtue. And, like you, I don't see this changing in the near term. But, perhaps optimistically, I do see a growing tendency in the direction of idealism, and not just amongst young people rebelling against self regarding advantage. Some of us children of the sixties still fondly remember our naivities, and still hanker after a world that pursues the common good before it rewards individual greediness.

So, I'm asking, not can a not-for-profit economy happen in the short term, but would it even be a practical, sustainable proposition if it ever came to be implemented?

Cheers, Strivax.

 

[Cute Tink]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Just wondering...

Best wishes, Strivax.

Star Trek. That's largely the idea behind their system. Money would become largely pointless especially after the invention of the Replicator (TNG).

Is it workable? Not unless people change somewhat.

 

[SkyWriting]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Just wondering...

Best wishes, Strivax.

An economy with no corporate taxes to fund government.
It's sounding good!

 

[Tull]

if the principle of that economy is you will receive no more for contributing greatly than he who contributes nothing then no it will not work.

 

[bhsmte]

To do so, would remove motivation to excel in what you do and would IMO, lessen the quality of products and services.

Also, non profits in some regards (hospitals especially) in the United States, want to and try to make as much profit as they can and they operate like for profit companies. The only difference is, what they do with the profits the organization makes. This is why you see hospitals building new buildings every five minutes, because they can't disperse profits to shareholders.

 

[Chany]

No. I understand cultural influences on work ethic and such, but I doubt the future economies, while they will change in structure, will not eliminate the for-profit or for-personal-benefit aspect of economics.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Sounds like Communism, at least its stated end goal of True Communism.

Or Fascism, which had a goal of the social advance of all members of the nation and the eventual extinction of for-profit private enterprise. (After all the Nazis were National Socialists). I have heard people argue that Star Trek actually depicts an idealised Fascist future.

Such a system would be ideal of course, but how to stop greed or humanity's desire for Power or abuse thereof is an open and in my opinion, insoluble problem.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Just wondering...

Best wishes, Strivax.

If you are looking at it ethnocentrically, no.

I am not using ethnocentric like it is commonly used: believing that one's own culture is superior.

I am using ethnocentric in a way that is closer to what it means in the context of cultural anthropology and other academic disciplines: filtering everything through one's own culture. It is a lack of consciousness of one's own culture, and subconsciously assuming that one's own culture is operating everywhere.

With the cultural blueprint that we have--with the assumptions that we make about ourselves, how our brains are wired, what motivates us, the concept of an "economy", what we say constitutes an "economy" and does not, etc.--a system consisting solely of non-profit enterprises probably would not work.

But if you are looking at it holistically you will likely find evidence that it is feasible. For example, there is probably plenty of behavior to be found outside of what we ethnocentrically demarcate as "the economy" that does not fit the humans-are-motivated-by-profit narrative. Neighbors exchanging flour for sugar and saving somebody a trip to the store, for example. If we must demarcate certain behaviors and institutions as "the economy", an "economy" dominated by transactions like the latter is not impossible.

Again, people need to read less neoclassical economics and more economic anthropology.

Wendell Berry is not an economic anthropologist, but his essay Christianity and The Survival of Creation contains a lot of insights about what a God-honoring economy might look like.

 

[Dave RP]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Just wondering...

Best wishes, Strivax.

I could run a not for profit organisation with a turnover of £3 million and costs of £1 million, pay myself £1 million per year salary and there would be no profit made. Seriously though, in theory profits are the reward for risk, if there was no risk, there'd be no innovation. As the former communist countries found out, no innovation = stagnation.

 

[jayem]

An economy with no corporate taxes to fund government.
It's sounding good!

Yeah, but many non-profits are also exempt from property, and other local taxes which fund fire, police, EMS, schools, and infrastructure. Leaving other property owners to foot the bill. This can be a big problem in smaller college towns, where a lot of land is off the tax rolls. Though some of the more responsible non-profits will voluntarily pay user fees for their share of such services.

 

[jayem]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Just wondering...

Best wishes, Strivax.

Financially, the most significant structural differences between for- and non-profits are:

1) Non-profits are tax-exempt. They can still earn money (which is called a "surplus." Not a profit. Which should be reinvested in the organization. And they must file financial reports with the IRS and their state regulators stating how much surplus has been generated, and how it's used.)

2) Non-profits don't have shareholders. They have no stock that can be bought or sold, and they don't pay dividends.

That's the problem. An enormous part of our economy is dependent on the stock market. IIRC, as of a couple years ago, the total value of all US stocks was over $60 trillion. What will happen to all this capital if there is no more stock trading? Most all pension and retirement accounts have investments in stocks. Dividends are necessary income for many persons. What will replace this? How can we transition to an economy where all business takes on the structure of non-profit enterprise?

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Seriously though, in theory profits are the reward for risk, if there was no risk, there'd be no innovation.

Social entrepreneurs do not take risks?

And I would argue that in a capitalist system we are all competing for money, not matter what status/designation one has under the law. To compete everybody has to be innovative, not just formally-established for-profit enterprises.

 

[joshua 1 9]

...built solely out of not-for-profit enterprises? Would it be possible to undertake all economic activity just for the sake of making the world a better place, and forego the motivation to become rich, altogether? What would be the advantages of such an economy, and what the disadvantages? What should be the Christian attitude to a national endeavour along these lines?

Sometimes the question of wages has to do with the cost of an education. The more your education cost the more your going to need to make some money to pay for your loans. Also some jobs are more difficult or stressful and people would not work those jobs if they did not get paid more then what they could earn on a less stressful job.

 

[SkyWriting]

Yeah, but many non-profits are also exempt from property, and other local taxes which fund fire, police, EMS, schools, and infrastructure. Leaving other property owners to foot the bill. This can be a big problem in smaller college towns, where a lot of land is off the tax rolls. Though some of the more responsible non-profits will voluntarily pay user fees for their share of such services.

I'm sorry. You said all non-profit. That means no business pays taxes.

 

[jayem]

I'm sorry. You said all non-profit. That means no business pays taxes.

Huh??? To what post are you referring?

 

[Strivax]

Sometimes the question of wages has to do with the cost of an education. The more your education cost the more your going to need to make some money to pay for your loans. Also some jobs are more difficult or stressful and people would not work those jobs if they did not get paid more then what they could earn on a less stressful job.

We are not talking, I think, so much about wages. The discussion really rests on whether the profit motive is a necessary driver of economic development.

Cheers, Strivax.

 

[joshua 1 9]

We are not talking, I think, so much about wages. The discussion really rests on whether the profit motive is a necessary driver of economic development.

Walmart makes 3% profit and Sam's children are some of the richest people in the country. They can very easily lose that profit to theft and I am sure they lose a lot of money to bad and inexperienced management and lack of training. If you take away the profit then you end up with communism and that does tend to cause people not to want to work if there is nothing in it for them.