FIRST - Reason for existance

[mtrawls]

When they can prove that they're motivated by something other than increased profit margins and shareholders returns, that sentiment will shift the paradigm of what it means to operate a business in this country.

Shift it from, oh I don't know, capitalism? Maybe I misunderstand you, but currently "what it means to operate a busness in this country" is all based on capitalism ... try to provide the best product as cheaply as possible so as to maximize profits. It sounds awfully greedy, sure, but are you saying it is a bad thing? Those increased profit margins that "motivate" people are what keeps innovation going (granted when people stop playing by the rules this isn't necessarily the case). If you'd prefer profit to stop being the motivating factor, what would you put in its place? Love, compassion, sympathy, pity, etc.? Is a farmer in the mid-west supposed to get up before the crack of dawn because he loves New York? Just look at the type of organizations that operate on these utopian principles ... you'll find a lack of competition and real motivation creates complacency, which is A Bad Thing. Increased profit margins, however "evil," create an incentive to do better. I'll refrain myself for now ... I think maybe I don't understand what you are saying. Are you suggesting that capitalism is somehow bad? You say "when they can prove that they're motivated by something other than incresed profit margins" ... but why should the by motivated by anything else, as a business? Success and history are hard to argue with; those organizations motivated around utopian goals have largely failed, or done worse than those motivated by profit.

Those people deserve such jobs far more than someone who wants ten times as much so their kids can wear Nike shoes and get driven to school in the family's Ford Excursion.

I'm refraining from a lot, but I will respond to this. How can you measure how much someone deserves a job? Or who is more worthy? Who gives you the moral superiority to say without a doubt that "those people deserve" the job "far more" than the greedy American who wants to "wear Nike shoes" and own a "Ford Excursion"? So far as I see it, if a person does honest and hard work, he deserves just compensation. If he wants to wear Nike shoes while some other poor person is lacking, is that so evil of him? The thing that really gets my blood boiling is these bleeding heart statements of "compassion." I won't say too much more. I'll show some restraint, and before I continue I'll ask for a clarification. You say they deserve the jobs more ... can you please tell me why? Do you have anything that these poor people do not have (be it Nike shoes or something else)? Would you give it up, or give up a job or job opportunity because they deserve it more? I'm sensing that you are trying to take a view of moral superiority ... maybe I'm wrong, and if so I'd like to be corrected (and I'm sure you'll be more than happy to correct me ).