I have no pretensions about this being a commercial enterprise with a profit motive.
It is true that it is better to teach a hungry woman how to fish than to feed her a fish. The former teaches independence and the latter teaches dependence.
I recognize that the profit motive is paramount. Think about it. What is the underlying contributing factor for every contribution made to a charitable organization in this world? The profit motive. For instance, Bill Gates or a General Electric make a charitable contribution out of monies obtained from a profit-driven enterprise. The average Jane making a charitable contribution out of her source of income (presumably from an entrepreneurial enterprise or a job). Even the government, perhaps the largest form of "non-profit" organization in the world, gets its funding (taxes) from activities that have a profitable motive. Would an unprofitable company be taxed? In that sense, setting up a profitable operation is of paramount importance as this results in funding charitable organizations. Without the former, the latter cannot exist. This view is not meant to in any way reduce the important role that non-profit and charitable organization play as they are after all a means through with the profitable resources generated in the world economy are channeled to those in need of help. Some non-profits teach to fish, other just provide the fish. I am not going to get into that debate though.
I think I am belaboring my point. I have personally had to grapple with whether I want to enter social service or set up a commercial, profit motivated organization. With my above belief, I think it makes sense for me personally to get into the latter.
Now the issue is, should I pursue a 100% profitable endeavor, one that after years or decades of work will enable me to set up a charitable foundation to give back to society? This is where I want to differ from the usual model of get rich and then, after a lapse of time, enter the charitable arena, although there is nothing inherently wrong in that approach. But here is my point. I think businesses should be charitable from day one. Profit is good, but perhaps not a 100% profit. For instance, if a company says that 20% of its profits will be earmarked for charity does not mean that this enterprise is deviating from being 100% profitable and only aiming to be 80% profitable. Instead, the way I would look at it is that a company is 100% focused on attaining the 80% profit and 100% focused on making the remaining 20% profit so that this could go towards socially responsible causes. It would be great if all companies view themselves not as instruments of profit but as instruments of social change. After all, a profitable company would enrich employees, motivate employees, and create greater spending power in society. That is social change. But also, the 20% would help the more unfortunate in this world. That is social change too.
The government, when you think of it, is such a small part of the workforce. Most people work in businesses. It is therefore the businesses and its employees who can bring about even greater social change than the government. I am not advocating that capitalism adapt to socialism. In fact, I don't care about an academic discussion about what capitalism and socialism are. I am saying that a business enterprise needs to be profit driven as well as have a conscience about making the world a better place. What we are seeing in today's world, with all the interconnectedness brought about by the Internet, is a greater awareness of all that happens in various parts of this world. For even a casual follower of the news, it should. hopefully, be obvious that changes in one corner do reverberate across the world. In such a world, the actions of a business in one corner of the world have a big/small/huge/insignificant impact somewhere else in the world. While this may have been true even centuries ago ( say with colonialism, for better or worse), it is just more visible today (Facebook, Starbucks's social responsibility, BP (in a bad way), etc.).
That is why, I am calling for the setting up of a new type of commercial enterprise. One that has profit as its primary motive, but also has a social agenda and a conscience for doing what is "good". Wall Street (WS), for instance, would be one sector that would be ripe for such a thought process. Of course, I don't want to spend another sentence on WS.
Sure, the rich can get richer and can spend on conspicuous consumption if they so choose to. Nothing wrong about that, particularly if you have worked hard and good to get there. But let not life be about ensconcing one self in the pleasures of life when the going is good. There is a lot of bad stuff that happens in the world, even if it is a "world away". So while one enjoys the fruits of a fortunate existence, one must not forget those who also seek to raise their standard of living, as they see fit. For at the end of the day, the whole world is interconnected and bad actions and practices will come back to bite whereas good actions and practices will create a perpetual cycle of goodness.
