Profit

[F1fan]

I would limit the total wealth any individual or business entity could amass. I don't care how quickly they get there, that is, how profitable they are, as long as not doing so illegally (despoiling the land), unethically (exploiting employees) or via oligopolies (price fixing and gouging). It is an existential risk to the rest of us.

This is just a principle. I don't have suggestions for what those caps should be, or specifically how to implement this.

Warren suggested a Wealth Tax that would offer a way to do this. I suspect there would be many new tax avoidance schemes used by the wealthy to avoid a cap, like investing in bogus companies overseas.

I also agree with Windfall taxes, as many companies do take avantage of demand to make excessive profits. Commerse in the USA gets away with a lot of unethical actions. There seems to be a great deal of deference to banks and industry by the federal government.

 

[Left Coast]

The major problem with government limiting profit
lies in giving government the power to limit profit.
Revoltistanian saying....
When you give The Man power to do something for you,
this also gives them the power to do something to you.

I understand. As a libertarian, is there a point at which you consider a business to be making an excessive amount of profit?

 

[Nakosis]

At what point is a business making excessive or immoral amounts of profit? Is there a profit margin businesses should be limited to? Why or why not?

How much profit should the government make?
For example the state of California recently made a 31 billion profit/surplus in tax revenue.
Is it immoral for a government to generate more tax revenue than is needed to run the state?

How much excess tax revenue should a government take in morally?

 

[Estro Felino]

There will never be a beautiful world.
All we can do is optimize.
And limiting wealth by law looks to be
at odds with that, ie, "hellish".

The wealthy who gain money unfairly are not immortal. They will die, they will turn into ash. As we all will.
Will their life have been worthy?
I don't think so.

 

[Revoltingest]

I understand. As a libertarian, is there a point at which you consider a business to be making an excessive amount of profit?

No.
Better to create an environment where markets
are free, workers are safe, products are safe,
the environment is safe, & consumers know what
they buy. Money earned will be ethical money,
even if a few become filthy stinking rich.

I'd like to have become one of them, but alas....
I'm only filthy stinking comfortable.

 

[Revoltingest]

The wealthy who gain money unfairly are not immortal. They will die, they will turn into ash. As we all will.
Will their life have been worthy?
I don't think so.

Tis for the individual to decide their path, not you.

 

[Estro Felino]

Tis for the individual to decide their path, not you.

We Christians believe in an afterlife.
Evidently not everyone does.

 

[Revoltingest]

We Christians believe in an afterlife.
Evidently not everyone does.

For a people who really believe in afterlife
& judgement, tis most odd that they behave
in a manner worthy of eternal punishment.
Mr Putin comes to mind.

 

[Nakosis]

At what point is a business making excessive or immoral amounts of profit? Is there a profit margin businesses should be limited to? Why or why not?

To answer your question, I would suggest that how much profit is made is not a moral question.
Whereas how it is made is.
If you are providing a product/service that people want at a price they are willing to pay no amount of profit is immoral.
However if you are forcing people to pay without any choice to do otherwise, like governmental taxes for example, excessive surplus taken in can be immoral.

 

[Estro Felino]

For a people who really believe in afterlife
& judgement, tis most odd that they behave
in a manner worthy of eternal punishment.
Mr Putin comes to mind.

That's for sure.

 

[Estro Felino]

Tis for the individual to decide their path, not you.

I was speaking of people who gain money dishonestly.
I have nothing against wealth achieved honestly. Because there are countless examples of people who got wealthy, respecting other people's work and dignity.

 

[Revoltingest]

I was speaking of people who gain money dishonestly. .

I think we can all assume the premise that criminal
behavior is wrong. So we should presume discussion
to be about behavior that is legal, but possibly immoral.
Which immoral behaviors should be illegalized or at
least dis-incentivized....that is the issue.

 

[Estro Felino]

I think we can all assume the premise that criminal
behavior is wrong. So we should presume discussion
to be about behavior that is legal, but possibly immoral.
Which immoral behaviors should be illegalized or at
least sanctioned against....that is the issue.

Morality is something secular.
For example gambling is considered immoral by many. Or prostitution.
But in Germany prostitution is legal and protected by the State because it's not considered immoral, secularly speaking. It is religiously speaking.

 

[Left Coast]

To answer your question, I would suggest that how much profit is made is not a moral question.
Whereas how it is made is.
If you are providing a product/service that people want at a price they are willing to pay no amount of profit is immoral.
However if you are forcing people to pay without any choice to do otherwise, like governmental taxes for example, excessive surplus taken in can be immoral.

Monopolies come to mind here. The difference with government in democratic countries is that we (collectively) choose it. But that diverts us onto a tangent for another thread.

 

[Stevicus]

How much profit should the government make?
For example the state of California recently made a 31 billion profit/surplus in tax revenue.
Is it immoral for a government to generate more tax revenue than is needed to run the state?

How much excess tax revenue should a government take in morally?

I would say it's immoral if they're not using that money for the public interest. It looks like they have some deficiencies in that area, particularly with fire prevention and homelessness, so if they're making that kind of surplus and not fulfilling their responsibilities as public servants, then yes, that's immoral.

 

[Rival]

I would say it's immoral if they're not using that money for the public interest. It looks like they have some deficiencies in that area, particularly with fire prevention and homelessness, so if they're making that kind of surplus and not fulfilling their responsibilities as public servants, then yes, that's immoral.

But what counts as 'public interest' and how much should be siphoned off?

 

[ChristineM]

Personally I don't think a business running at 20% net profit margin is "just greedy" per se. Businesses may need the money to expand, for example. But I don't have a particular number in mind of how much would be too much. I thought others here might though.

Gross profit is used in expansion, net is what is left after paying out all expenses, wages, taxes,

 

[ChristineM]

Should this limit be applied daily, monthly, yearly, or
over a longer time frame? I ask because profit varies.
So making 15% profit one month wouldn't be enuf to
offset larger losses in other months. This would have
the effect of making business operators far far more
safety oriented. Less chaos in the market, but also
far less innovation.

Year end

 

[Stevicus]

But what counts as 'public interest' and how much should be siphoned off?

Theoretically, the public servants would do that, while giving careful consideration to public input and public needs. That's where the process starts to break down a bit.

 

[Left Coast]

Gross profit is used in expansion, net is what is left after paying out all expenses, wages, taxes,

I suppose that's true, expansion would be part of a business' operating expenses.