[Closed] Why is "profit" a dirty word?

Ethics & the quality of service provided?

It's not.

Just as benefits isn't.

Unfortunately stupid people on all sides make stupid accusations that all people meeting certain spurious criteria are scum/bad/whatever.

HTH.

Ethics & the quality of service provided?

Maybe, but then when an LBS does that they get shouted out for charging too much and making a profit.

profit is a good thing, it means a company can grow and hire more people and it also means it can pay more money to employees (be they high or low level).

Or it can just mean more money for the shareholders and no inprovement for customers or the people who do the work. As above, ethics and service.

Because it is part of profiteroles. The best sex toys eva!

😯

Generalising is always overrated. SWIDT?

Maybe, but then when an LBS does that they get shouted out for charging too much and making a profit.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/truth-richard-branson-virgin-rail-profits ]Virgin Rail Profits[/url]

[url= http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/news/fca-launches-full-investigation-in-tesco-profit-overstatement/a775462 ]Tesco Profits[/url]

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11109845/Why-arent-the-British-middle-classes-staging-a-revolution.html ]Private Equity profits[/url]

Sorry, forgot

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/wonga-scandal-politicians-and-regulators-are-ignoring-the-causes-of-this-social-cancer-9770574.html ]Wonga Profits[/url]

Oddly enough Wonga and their ilk are less damaging to the general population than most of the major banks and lenders however they are an easy target. You could make the argument that they provide short term money when no one else can to people who desperately need it and charge an appropiate rate for the risk involved or you could call them glorified loan sharks - Your call.

Secured lenders are far, far worse on the whole.

[i]It seems on STW (and [s]arguably in the media at large[/s] on the BBC ) that companies making profit is seen as a bad thing. It doesn't matter whether it is Wonga, Tesco or Virgin Trains, if you've made a profit you are bad.[/i]

Maybe, but in Tesco's case, I think we all have an issue with Tesco claiming profit they haven't actually made.

[i]Can someone explain why this is? [/i]
Oops, on here you're going to get two answers, which will then descend into [b]BICKERING[/b]! in true STW forum stylee. Enjoy!

[i]In my eyes, profit is a good thing, it means a company can grow and hire more people and it also means it can pay more money to employees (be they high or low level).
[/i]And pay more tax, and pay off share holders, and fund managers who inturn payout pensions.

Wow, it all seems so joined up.....
😉

Sorry OP, the pre-emptive sarcasm isn't aimed at you.
Carry on.

[i]I shout about mine because he charges lots but is also useless. I don't use him anymore. [/i]
😆

Profit is inherently immoral, it's a measure of how much you have ripped off your customers.

There is nothing wrong with making a profit. That's how businesses expand and employ more people.

But when organisations privatise profits and then socialise losses that's hardly fair.

When companies use their power to corner a market and eliminate competition then people should rightly take issue with it.

DP

[i]richmtb - Member
DP

[/i]

I think Binners has had too much of that.

charging >4000% APR isnt profit its extortion imho

http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2011/09/21/fact-borrowing-100-at-wongas-apr-costs-more-than-the-us-national-debt-over-14-trillion-after-7-years/

<insert binners rant here>

The trouble with making a profit is you get taxed.

Virgin Trains profit from public subsidy while delivering falling standards and increasing prices, I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be down on that.

In my eyes, profit is a good thing, it means a company can grow and hire more people and it also means it can pay more money to employees (be they high or low level).

IMHO the problem is scale. A small firm with 12 employees making 80 k profit for the hardworking employer then no one will object same company makes 1 million for the owner and folk object
Multinationals making hundred and /or thousands a minute profit and many will be uncomfortable with the extent and size of the profit.

Basically at that point they are just ripping you off and it is a further drift of money from the poor to the wealthy - who owns shares in companies and get the profits ? its not cleaners is it?

Profit is what's left over in an unfair system of exchange.

You pay/give more for something than it is worth.

Some really twisted people seem to think that this sort of thing should be something to aspire to.

Joolsburger, you need better bait!

We make a profit..... I feel bad now...

it also means it can pay more money to employees

I don't think you fully understand what profit is. It's withholding the full value of someone's work. If you start paying people higher wages because you have a surplus then you will very quickly have no profit.

Profit is neither a dirty nor a clean word, it's just a word. There's nothing wrong with making a profit and there's nothing wrong with not making any profit, it just depends on what your objects are.

Making a loss is often not a good idea although again it depends on your objectives - activities which result in financial loss can sometimes be worthwhile.

Unfortunately some extremists have a complete obsession with profit and want to make it out of everything, irrespective of the consequences or the laws of commonsense.

Try buying something on the classifieds then selling it on for a profit. You will rightly be derided. That's my attitude to profit.

Usually for large companies the workers and a good chunk of the General population are shareholders, for those who have a pension or savings in equity based investments.

Claiming the workers/general population own a "good chunk " is misleading if not actually false.

Pension funds held an estimated 4.7% by value at the end of 2012, down from 5.6% in 2010, and significantly lower than the levels seen in recent years.

Individuals just over 10%
foreign investors over 50%

UK stock exchange only
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pnfc1/share-ownership---share-register-survey-report/2012/stb-share-ownership-2012.html

Even if 15% of the population is a good chunk, it's still a lot less than the percentage of the population that are customers or employees.

My pension fund is invested by about 60% in equities (which isn't too unusual for company and high street funds I believe). I have a couple of Isa's and some share schemes with the company I work for. Also my job and livelihood depends upon the company I work for making juicy profits, as well as my company's customers (who ultimately pay my wages) and the companies that supply my company. So irrespective of what the statistics say, bearing in mind that 89.426% of statistics are completely and utterly meaningless, I hope all these companies continue to make juicy profits, my pension pot grows well, my investments hit the jackpot etc.

If an individual is prepared to invest vast sums of their own personal wealth into a company then why shouldn't they benefit correspondingly if the company thrives? It's their risk, their gamble so good luck to them.

What are the ethics you speak of? Clearly investing in an Indian sweatshop is unethical, but a company doing well and making a good profit through a combination of taking sensible risks, some clever insight into the business world and a smattering of luck is completely and utterly ethical.

So irrespective of what the statistics say

facts MY view does not need facts

89.426% of statistics are completely and utterly meaningless

If an individual is prepared to invest vast sums of their own personal wealth into a company then why shouldn't they benefit correspondingly if the company thrives? It's their risk, their gamble so good luck to them.

No problem with that as long as there is risk involved. The element of risk is missing from things like utilities, public transport and PFI type deals where one R Branson has referred to the "licence to print money" he has with the NW rail service.

The aspiration to continual growth is also misplaced as we are currently finding out.

Nothing wrong with profit, who would start a business without the expectation of making a profit.

It's the obsession with maximising profit that is damaging in my view.

I.e. Huge financial corporation makes £4.5 billion profit in 2012. Hurrah. Healthy share price.

Same corporation makes £4 billion profit in 2013. Wailing, gnashing of teeth, heads must roll, share price drops.

Ridiculous. Maybe I'm naive.

Because people hate to think other people are earning more money than them for doing something less worthy/skilful/easier, businesses profiting just presses the same emotional buttons especially those belonging to people who fail to see the bigger picture and have an insular view of how the world works.

^

nail, head

profit is a dirty word because people (in general) are unwilling to admit their own jealousy of other peoples fiscal situation

That's like saying men (in general)~ are jealous of rapists because they can have sex with anyone they want.

Indeed it is an indication of a number of factors
1. They want to get an emotional reaction
2. They find it easier to attack folk than defend what they think- an indication of both their character and their argument.
3. Because they are avaricious, jealous and envious they think everyone else is.
I am not envious of billionairres am i sad about this and wish to redress it

[img] [/img]

TBH Most folk who oppose excessive profit want fairness. Its pretty hard to attack someone who wants a fair world [ or defend the above image] hence we get insults rather than argument.

To me "profit" is a neutral word.

Its how that profit is achieved, and what is done with it, that colours our perception of it.

[i]allthepies - Member
<insert binners rant here> [/i]
😆

[i]MrSmith - Member
Because people hate to think other people are earning more money than them for doing something less worthy/skilful/easier, businesses profiting just presses the same emotional buttons especially those belonging to people who fail to see the bigger picture and have an insular view of how the world works.[/i]
Very, good.

The alternative is socialism

[i]edward2000 - Member
The alternative is socialism [/i]

Eh? The [i]Alternative[/i] to profit? That's a loss then.
Oh, hang on...

Northwind - Member
Virgin Trains profit from public subsidy while delivering falling standards and increasing prices, I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be down on that.

This^

[quote=edward2000 said]The alternative is socialism
Again you seem to be defending it by attacking the alternative.

[i]Junkyard - lazarus

edward2000 said » The alternative is socialism

Again you seem to be defending it by attacking the alternative.

Will there be enough room under the bridge for both solo and smith? [/i]

And to think, you could have posted something [i]intelligent[/i]?
Ok, may be not.

But I do think Mr Smith has properly summed up you and the other leftites.
😉

Where's Grum ? I expect he'll be along soon to tell us how he earns less than any of us, which some how entitles him to judge us all as [b]BAD[/b] people.
TFiF
😆

Edit:
Ha!, sorry Junky, I appear to have out ninja-edited you.

Profit isn't immoral. But personally I think to profit from somethings that should be publically owned is.

I remembered it was best to not feed the two trolls or get involved as you both just want a response not a debate as your long litany of personal prods and goads so amply demonstrates in just one post.

Ps still not even an attempt at a defence just some name calling

That's like saying men (in general)~ are jealous of rapists because they can have sex with anyone they want.

it is? really? are you sure?

Incidently its the thing that's wrong with the 'system' the moment if you ask me. Privatising everything, privatisation should be used as an efficiency tool. Once thing have reached an efficient profitable level, they should be taken back into public ownership, and profits should then be passed on to everyone as savings.

Profit gets dirty because people are greedy.

Northwind - Member
Virgin Trains profit from public subsidy while delivering falling standards and increasing prices, I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be down on that.

This is a great example of a great headline not being supported by the facts of the matter.

Firstly, rail fares are regulated. The inflation busting formula was defined under the last government and linked to RPI rather than CPI - the agreement is subject to legislation that means the formula can't be touched until 2015 at the earliest. Operators are required to raise additional revenue under the formula and that revenue is then disbursed to national rail for infrastructure and to staff via the negotiated increases for the unionised element of the workforce.

The increased prices are therefore very little to do with Virgin as they don't have control over them - the profit generated based on the working capital employed, and the need to pay a franchise fee of c£1Bn every few years means that despite the public perception of fat cat train operators because of the fare rises it's not a brilliant investment and they can go bust - as happened to National Express and one other franchisee.

As for the falling standards, there are a record number of passengers travelling, and a record number arriving on time - both in absolute and percentage terms. Some of the rolling stock is showing its age but why would an operator make a decision to invest with a 20-30 year payback period when they can lose the franchise and their capital investment after only 8 years?

What we probably shouldn't lose sight of is that despite our rail fares being high, the overall cost of the train journeys (fare paid + taxpayer subsidy) is a lot lower per passenger mile than other countries. So we have a choice - given there's limited extra capacity on the train network do we:

1. Raise tax and subsidise existing passengers more - so everyone pays more even those who don't travel?
2. Increase capacity by investing in infrastructure or other forms of travel - creating competition that almost inevitably drives down prices as has been seen in things like Telecoms and Energy, both of which are cheaper in the UK than many other European countries?
3. Nationalise the whole lot and borrow the £80B or so to do that and then hope it will be better run under public ownership - bearing in mind that the train networks with the worst safety record in Europe are now those that are publicly owned / run?

I personally think the virgin service is ok but not great. The fare increases are largely out of their hands and amongst other things go on giving the train drivers ridiculous wage rises every year that mean my mate who works as a driver now gets total remuneration approaching £90K a year with overtime - significantly more than most pilots who have to pass an incredibly demanding training course - and works 35ish hours a week and getting 6-8 weeks leave a year.

[i]Ps still not even an attempt at a defence just some name calling [/i]

Crude attempt, hardly worth validating other than to correct it by suggesting that instead of just sitting back, looking down the barrel of your sniper's rifle, inviting folk to [i]defend[/i] (presumption / deliberate attempt to prejudice the discussion, tut).

Try being the prosecution and explain your problem with profit.
(Expects any such attempt to be insultingly one sided and full of holes)
😉

Regarding Teso and their profits, according to http://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/apr/21/tesco-record-profits-supermarket they made £3bn last year and according to http://www.tescoplc.com/index.asp?pageid=276 they get 75 million shopping trips a week.

I make that about 77p profit per shopping trip, which sounds quite reasonable to me.

Expects any such attempt to be insultingly one sided and full of holes

Still not a defence but you knew that

nom nom nom

Anyway bikes to ride

[i]I doubt i coud hit your dizzying heights and I wont challenge you on your area of expertise[/i]
Outing you for deliberately attempting to prejudice a discussion. Just a pity you thought you could slide that by everyone. Says a lot.

[i]Still not a defence but you knew that

nom nom nom

Anyway bikes to ride [/i]

The defense can't respond before it's heard the prosecution. So, in true Junky stylee, it's been easier for you to sneer and attempt to rebuke others, even after being invited to offer your own opinion.
You personify Mr Smiths remarks, admirably.
Thank you and byeeeee.
😀

Get a room.

[i]neilwheel - Member
Get a room.

[/i]

We're already there, this is as good as it gets. Suck it up, butter cup.
😉

Profit is only regarded as dirty by people who feel they are being profited from.

There's a very fine line between profit and greed.. All too often that line becomes invisible..

People seem to have an inbuilt predisposition towards becoming aroused by it and that's not good for the future of humanity.. I reckon a high five, in the face with a chair should be applied when people start getting turned on by walking that tightrope

Suck it up, butter cup.

No thanks, I'll just skip your posts if you obviously have nothing useful to add.

robdixon - Member

This is a great example of a great headline not being supported by the facts of the matter.

You don't seem to dispute the most important point- that Virgin (like all but one of the other private train companies) makes a net benefit from subsidies- they pay a franchise fee, then get more back as a result. I wish I had to pay a fee like that. "Here's your £200 rent- now where's my £300 "living in the house" subsidy?"

That's even leaving aside hidden subsidies like slashing track charges and having network rail run up massive publically underwritten debt (*) instead of having the operators pay their share.

(* and then working very hard to remove it from the national debt figures)

Whether the ticket prices are driven from government or the train companies doesn't actually matter- what matters is that the public pays more for an essential service which devours subsidies yet claims to make a profit. Either way, it's taxpayer's money.

Oh, service- it's just not true that Virgin are delivering good punctuality, they were the worst of the rail providers last year. It's also not true that it's at a record high as an industry, in fact it's falling.

There is no legal limit to profit, so big-business evolves into profiteering because CEOs are driven to make shareholders feel wealthy, not to make them feel ethical. Big business does this by driving up prices and driving down costs to make the shareholder wealthier while the customers and workers become poorer.

Profit gets dirty because people are greedy.

This..any enterprise needs sufficient profits to pay its staff, develop new products or services and provide a return to investors.

Any of those to excess is greed and usually ends up with someone else paying the price indirectly.

I just wonder how these companies like Starbucks and Amazon carry on, when they've never actually made a profit? Gawd bless em for persevering though 😉

I just wonder how these companies like Starbucks and Amazon carry on, when they've never actually made a profit?

Same as the UK to an extent, as long as they are paying their debts and don't have a cash flow problem, then they are fine.

In theory...

Nothing wrong with profit as anyone making excessive profits will soon find others trying to get a share - seems supermarkets might be going through this.

Monopolies can make unfair profits so we have the Gov't to help make sure that doesn't happen 🙂 In cases where, say Virgin make more money than seems right for a train line, there should be companies competing to get the contract so the right price is set.

In theory.

[i]Incidently its the thing that's wrong with the 'system' the moment if you ask me. Privatising everything, privatisation should be used as an efficiency tool. Once thing have reached an efficient profitable level, they should be taken back into public ownership, and profits should then be passed on to everyone as savings.[/i]

That's hilarious! 😀

[i]"You don't seem to dispute the most important point- that Virgin (like all but one of the other private train companies) makes a net benefit from subsidies- they pay a franchise fee, then get more back as a result. I wish I had to pay a fee like that. "Here's your £200 rent- now where's my £300 "living in the house" subsidy?""[/i]

But this overlooks the painfully obvious fact that having a franchise [b]isn't[/b] a guarantee of making a profit - as the franchises that went bust found out. It's not a "fee for a guaranteed profit" when they have to:

- take the financial risks associated with operating the service (staff, customer risks)
- raise and finance the capital required to operate the service e.g. the hundreds of millions required for rolling stock
- stimulate the demand / passenger numbers for the service

...Get any of these wrong and it's a loss or bankruptcy.

robdixon - Member

But this overlooks the painfully obvious fact that having a franchise isn't a guarantee of making a profit

I'm not overlooking it exactly, I just don't think it's at all relevent. Yes it's possible they could fail to make a profit while delivering a poor and growing poorer service at greater cost to the taxpayer and customer- that doesn't make it OK that they're doing all those things.

@Rockape63 - that is indeed hilarious !

Have you heard the one about the French, German, and Chinese governments, owning and taking profits from our vital energy/transport infrastructure to spend on their own people ?

That's absolutely hilarious too.

Along with the old "privatise the profit nationalise the loss" joke it must rank as one of the most hilarious of the privatisation jokes.

In my eyes, profit is a good thing, it means a company can grow and hire more people and it also means it can pay more money to employees (be they high or low level).

I am a leftie, and i don't object to private companies making a profit at all, indeed if they didn't they wouldn't be able to pay any taxes into the treasuries big pot.

However what i do object to is corporations that make billions in profits, pay there workers a poor wage in this country and employ child labour/dangerous conditions where they can, do their best to avoid paying any tax and pay the very small minority at the top of the corporation more money in one year than most people could dream of earning in a life time.

Profits = capitalism = screwing over people/the environment to do so

Profit isn't a dirty word. Loss is. At least when you are in business.

Profits = capitalism = screwing over people/the environment to do so

Thus why I stated earlier socialism is the alternative and everything becomes nationalised and all motivation is sucked out of society. Look at Cuba for an example.

Profit is not a dirty word. Those people that suggest otherwise are being short sighted.

Profits = capitalism = screwing over people/the environment to do so

Thus why I stated earlier socialism is the alternative and everything becomes nationalised and all motivation is sucked out of society. Look at Cuba for an example.

Profit is not a dirty word. Those people that suggest otherwise are being short sighted.

Yes I noticed the complete lack of motivation the staff on the intensive care unit that saved my sister's life last month had. It must have been because their goal wasn't to make a profit.

As others have written, profit allows my employer to invest in new equipment, remain competitive and generate salary and dividends for us shareholders and our families while delivering an honest ethical product to our customers, which in turn enables them to succeed and generate the cash with which they can run their own businesses and so on ad infinitum.

Anybody with fancy ideas about the sin of profit ought to go and live a self-sufficient life in Antarctica because living in Britain they are benefiting from the immense profits made by centuries of international trade, which of course includes slavery, an inseparable part of the equation.

Yes I noticed the complete lack of motivation the staff on the intensive care unit that saved my sister's life last month had. It must have been because their goal wasn't to make a profit.

[img] [/img]