Altruist Thoughts...

[8v10un30sun]

Would a non-profit company ever beat out a for-profit?  Would you be able to hire the best mind and executives?

[petsdraw]

No because profit isn't the focus/goal.

Would they get the some of the best minds? I think so because not everyone is out to simply satisfy their greed.  It's hard to see sometimes but there are good people in the world. 

[Xyooj96]

Would a non-profit company ever beat out a for-profit?  Would you be able to hire the best mind and executives?

the largest revenues company/entity is a for-profit enterprise.

unitedway was/is probably the largest revenues non-profit enterprise, but look at how much the CEO gets. it's really a license to steal from behind the curtains/walls.

[YAX]

Would a non-profit company ever beat out a for-profit?  Would you be able to hire the best mind and executives?

  Our government is a non profit org and it still hasn't reached the end of its life cycle while millions of other for profit companies have come and gone.   

[8v10un30sun]

Can you summarize for us dumb people.  K...thx.

could you be any dumber? (that's a rhetorical question in case you didn't get it)

here's to help you out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svwGRJA28lY

[8v10un30sun]

 Our government is a non profit org and it still hasn't reached the end of its life cycle while millions of other for profit companies have come and gone.  

Again, this is a qualified statement asking that would the best mind be interested in working for a NPO given they will not wield large government power or be put in the limelight.  Would you work for the Salvation Army?

The biggest question I ask that some of us are ignorant to includes, have we reached a tipping point to a paradigm shift?  The obvious answer as intelligently pointed by Pepper calling me dumb is that no...and you can provide an array of companies with why...and why money talks.  However, in Star Trek which is a pretty damn indicator of the future has told a story that humanity works for the improvement of humanity money is no longer a value...wherea s the pursuit of knowledge, the pursuit of science, or as said, the instrinsic is more important because technology has allow all humanity to live in equality.

Anyways, we have PhD yet again on PH with a new nick and same stank.

[8v10un30sun]

a rhetorical question is one that does not require an answer. the focus is on what the implied answer to the question must be. hope that helps you become smarter. 

How does rhetorical question work in a paradigm shift?  Is it still the same answer?  I'm too stupid to understand paradigm shift too.  Can you google for us stupid people?  k thx

[8v10un30sun]

You are so FUNNY!  You are one of those difficult people who read books on how to work with difficult people.

 

HILARIOUS.  Common denominator is YOU.

10% now...wow I'm famous in your book.  10% on me...I must be your god.

[8v10un30sun]

let me give you an example of how you are in here...

LOL. FAIL! k, i'm done with out smarting you. 

Here you are talking about being smart and me needing a job and yet all you did today was stalk PH to write nasty comments.  Thank you for proving all of us right.

[Lady_Fallin]

At the nonprofit agency I'm interning at... the executive gets nearly $100,000 a year.

[YAX]

In considering if Smart people would actually work for non profits, Just think of who runs the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. 

[8v10un30sun]

I should have qualified my statement better.

What if For-Profit went away or became a dinosaur and all that existed was Non-profit...meaning all the profits goes to lowering cost and giving better $$ to people.  I know some people will say that's socialism...or shareholders won't go for it but the stakeholders here are shareholders, employees and customers.  What is best for the shareholders does not necessarily equate best to all stakeholders.

Before arriving the my initial statement, there must be a great paradigm shift.  The greatest and best mind must be willing to work in hordes at NPO and forgo, For-profit...the balancing act is that NPO should pay more.  Back in the good old days, government job actually paid much better than private unless you own your small business (mom & pop shop).  Now that the inefficiencies of the government due to many things, government no longer can provide the value necessary to all stakeholder... case in point how fedex stomps on USPS, or how waste management owns waste management versus what use to be a city role.

Private companies are much better at this than public...yet private companies want to obtain massive profits and do so at any cost and this includes screwing the stakeholders royally.  Examples of this is banks, healthcare, and etc...  Now that I'm working for a consumer product company with global reach, I'm seeing how much profit and waste that exists...insan e...this waste could have been put back to the stakeholders.. .furthermore, I see how companies does not care about employees and customers and they go for the bottom line.  A good case is Wal-Mart...for the low prices we get, they nail you to the wall...they take at minimum 30% of the profit.  

If a Non-profit capitalistic society existed, 1% would not own 50% of the wealth and the wealth would be spread more equally thus restoring the middle class.  I don't see such corporate structures like we have today existing another 100 years without some form of revolution...t his is the same old crap...plutocr acy just semantics are different.  You don't need a imperialistic government, you'll have an imperialistic corporation who reports back 40% of the profit to the government.   

[YAX]

for one thing, "non-profit capitalistic society" is an oxymoron.

As for the initial part of your statement.  The Russians tried that.  It didn't work out very well for them.  It sounded great in theory, but in reality, human greed faulted it.  The best thing is to let human greed guide companies since that creates progress and innovation.

[8v10un30sun]

Why can't you have free market society with private ownership that is not for profit aka non-profit?  How is that an oxymoron?  Isn't that the bigger calling?  To compete for the sake of competition and innovation; is that sufficient???  It seems practically incorrect but in Star Trek, that is exactly what they did...  An entire civilization competed to be better for everyone so the sum of all is better by that versus this 1% owns 50%.

Russia is not a free market with private ownership.  It was a government owned...  Nobody was intrinsically motivated to work.  You work because you wanted to or stayed home.  All the new research shows that money is not the biggest driver...there must be an intrinsic factor that is bigger than all of us to drive people to excel.  The 1930-1960 was driven exactly by that!!!  That was the GOLDEN AGE of America scientifically and economically.. .

[YAX]

Now you're talking bro..  The next question is... Who would want to a company that isnt making money?  Certainly not investors.  So that leaves people who arent outbto make a profit, but if your not trying to make a profit, it's not capitalism anymore.