Your objection is dishonest, and you are projecting a cocky attitude, which is not supporting constructive discussion.
I in particular am not considering only businesses traded on the stock market, but rather I simply responded to your analysis that specifically targeted such businesses.
Your explanations continue to sidestep the objection I raised, and obscure the deeper structure and relations with misleading language. They represent a business as an entity distinct and autonomous from its owners, and in a relationship with them.
Owners of a business confer no benefit to the business. Their investments are not wealth being transferred from investor to business, the way someone might transfer funds to a friend or retailer. Similarly, stocks are not provided or created by business, as may be goods or services a business creates through the labor of workers. Investment is the purchasing of assets, representing the business itself, of which the investor then becomes the owner. Stocks are simply a representation of ownership over a business.
There is no feature or event that is beneficial to a business in spite of not being beneficial to the owner, because a business is nothing except that which is owned by its owners, for the private interests of its owners.
Businesses exist for one reason, profit.
Please reflect sincerely, before responding, and lose the snooty tone.
Calling me names for asking how people are dying due to actions of the food industry isn’t something that will help affect my choice of words. Sorry for sounding cocky after that. Showing me you seemingly didn’t know how stocks are created and then sold by the company helped set the stage.
Businesses exist for a number of reasons, legal and personal. A business can exist without profit as long as its expenses and earnings meet. So I wouldn’t say businesses exist for profit.
It is up to each individual how they run their business. This also applies to whether they sell shares to outsiders. Best we can hope to do is through legislation try to make sure there aren’t feedback loops that reinforce skewed power dynamics and negative behaviour.
You’ve said your piece, I don’t think I agree. I’ve said mine, I don’t think you agree. That’s about it. Keep on rocking in the free world.
Your are adhering to mythical and counterfactual ideals.
A business occurs not in a vacuum, but rather within a total system of interacting forces. The system is not compatible with the occurrence of businesses that are under performing with respect to investor expectations or market pressures.
You may imagine the ideal that someone would want to create or to purchase a business for reasons other than profit, but such an ideal remains as one that is elusive within to the practical structure of the economic system.
Your are also continuing to conflate a product, which is created in a business by the labor of workers, with stocks, which are not products, but rather are simply paper issued as a vehicle to represent exchangeable ownership of the business.
Insisting that stocks are “created”, even if such is the vernacular term, is not supporting critical understanding, and neither is asserting another’s ignorance. Stocks are a business, not a product created by a business.
If you buy shoes created by a shoe manufacturer, you then own only the shoes. If you buy stocks “created” by a business, you then own the business itself.
Such distinctions are critical to understand robustly, rather than deflecting sloppily. They also are not opinions or perspectives, but rather observations that can be evaluated critically. I asked you to consider sincerely, and yet you remain smug and dismissive.
Your objection is dishonest, and you are projecting a cocky attitude, which is not supporting constructive discussion.
I in particular am not considering only businesses traded on the stock market, but rather I simply responded to your analysis that specifically targeted such businesses.
Your explanations continue to sidestep the objection I raised, and obscure the deeper structure and relations with misleading language. They represent a business as an entity distinct and autonomous from its owners, and in a relationship with them.
Owners of a business confer no benefit to the business. Their investments are not wealth being transferred from investor to business, the way someone might transfer funds to a friend or retailer. Similarly, stocks are not provided or created by business, as may be goods or services a business creates through the labor of workers. Investment is the purchasing of assets, representing the business itself, of which the investor then becomes the owner. Stocks are simply a representation of ownership over a business.
There is no feature or event that is beneficial to a business in spite of not being beneficial to the owner, because a business is nothing except that which is owned by its owners, for the private interests of its owners.
Businesses exist for one reason, profit.
Please reflect sincerely, before responding, and lose the snooty tone.
Hey all allright.
Calling me names for asking how people are dying due to actions of the food industry isn’t something that will help affect my choice of words. Sorry for sounding cocky after that. Showing me you seemingly didn’t know how stocks are created and then sold by the company helped set the stage.
Businesses exist for a number of reasons, legal and personal. A business can exist without profit as long as its expenses and earnings meet. So I wouldn’t say businesses exist for profit.
It is up to each individual how they run their business. This also applies to whether they sell shares to outsiders. Best we can hope to do is through legislation try to make sure there aren’t feedback loops that reinforce skewed power dynamics and negative behaviour.
You’ve said your piece, I don’t think I agree. I’ve said mine, I don’t think you agree. That’s about it. Keep on rocking in the free world.
Your are adhering to mythical and counterfactual ideals.
A business occurs not in a vacuum, but rather within a total system of interacting forces. The system is not compatible with the occurrence of businesses that are under performing with respect to investor expectations or market pressures.
You may imagine the ideal that someone would want to create or to purchase a business for reasons other than profit, but such an ideal remains as one that is elusive within to the practical structure of the economic system.
Your are also continuing to conflate a product, which is created in a business by the labor of workers, with stocks, which are not products, but rather are simply paper issued as a vehicle to represent exchangeable ownership of the business.
Insisting that stocks are “created”, even if such is the vernacular term, is not supporting critical understanding, and neither is asserting another’s ignorance. Stocks are a business, not a product created by a business.
If you buy shoes created by a shoe manufacturer, you then own only the shoes. If you buy stocks “created” by a business, you then own the business itself.
Such distinctions are critical to understand robustly, rather than deflecting sloppily. They also are not opinions or perspectives, but rather observations that can be evaluated critically. I asked you to consider sincerely, and yet you remain smug and dismissive.