3 ms·
I imagine the main argument has to do with having enough surplus to innovate. That said of course there’s plenty of times where surplus doesn’t go to innovation
by williamtrask 4y ago
I imagine the main argument has to do with having enough surplus to innovate. That said of course there’s plenty of times where surplus doesn’t go to innovation.
- shadowfoxx 4y agoThe fact that a company has profit at all means there is surplus. They mean the same thing. as a side note; "Innovation" in my view is not a reason in and of itself to do something. Its too nebulous a term to have real meaning. Like - how much innovating are 7-11's doing or most other commercial shops? Would that money be better spent elsewhere? What percentage of 'innovations' actually fail vs those that prove worth it? etc etc.