4 ms·

Your argument here boils down to "all decision making can be viewed in terms of expected net economic gain/loss", and while I don't disagree with you, it isn't

Your argument here boils down to "all decision making can be viewed in terms of expected net economic gain/loss", and while I don't disagree with you, it isn't a very salient or novel point. My whole argument is this: Public shareholders compel their businesses to treat market capitalization and/or dividends as the principal goals. Private owners, though, may have goals other than the business's value or profit, such as "tradition". Whether those other goals can be thought of in terms of monetary value seems orthogonal.

randomdata 3y ago
> Whether those other goals can be thought of in terms of monetary value seems orthogonal. The original comment which set the context and of which we are talking to was specifically about the monetary accounting. It cannot possibly be orthogonal. Perhaps what you are trying to say, as has been hinted at before, is that said comment, while perhaps technically true in a vacuum, doesn't really mean anything in practice? To which I would agree.
- kdmccormick 3y ago
  This is what set the context: > This is the way to think about all businesses. Even if they’ve been making your favourite products for years, never forget that they’re just here to make money. > People who attach morals, norms, and emotions to businesses are falling into the marketing trap. and my point is that not all small business are just here to make money, ie that morals and emotions may be relevant to them. I'm baffled as to why this is a controversial point. If your point is saying that, to small business owners, money may be exachanged for immaterial things like tradition and satisfsction, then we are in agreement!. It meams that their purpose is not "just to make money", unlike publicly traded companies, whose market-enforced purpose is "just to make money".
  - randomdata 3y ago
    > If your point is saying that, to small business owners, money may be exachanged for immaterial things like tradition and satisfsction, then we are in agreement!' Owners of all businesses, no matter how large or small, use the value generated from the business to trade it for things like tradition and satisfaction that is to their personal taste, yes. There is nothing special about small businesses here. In fact, it is likely that many small business owners also own large, publicly traded businesses at the same time. Are they magically different people, with different ideas on how to spend the money they have at their disposal, when money flows in from the large business rather than the small business? I expect you will find the answer is no. It would take someone extremely eccentric to colour their money such that "This money came from my small business, so I will only do good with it!" along with "This money came from my large business, so it is reserved only for evil! Muhuhahaha." In practice, money is money is money.
    - kdmccormick 3y ago
      We're talking in circles.
      - randomdata 3y ago
        No. We've never wavered from the original talk.

randomdata 3y ago

> Whether those other goals can be thought of in terms of monetary value seems orthogonal. The original comment which set the context and of which we are talking to was specifically about the monetary accounting. It cannot possibly be orthogonal. Perhaps what you are trying to say, as has been hinted at before, is that said comment, while perhaps technically true in a vacuum, doesn't really mean anything in practice? To which I would agree.

kdmccormick 3y ago
This is what set the context: > This is the way to think about all businesses. Even if they’ve been making your favourite products for years, never forget that they’re just here to make money. > People who attach morals, norms, and emotions to businesses are falling into the marketing trap. and my point is that not all small business are just here to make money, ie that morals and emotions may be relevant to them. I'm baffled as to why this is a controversial point. If your point is saying that, to small business owners, money may be exachanged for immaterial things like tradition and satisfsction, then we are in agreement!. It meams that their purpose is not "just to make money", unlike publicly traded companies, whose market-enforced purpose is "just to make money".
- randomdata 3y ago
  > If your point is saying that, to small business owners, money may be exachanged for immaterial things like tradition and satisfsction, then we are in agreement!' Owners of all businesses, no matter how large or small, use the value generated from the business to trade it for things like tradition and satisfaction that is to their personal taste, yes. There is nothing special about small businesses here. In fact, it is likely that many small business owners also own large, publicly traded businesses at the same time. Are they magically different people, with different ideas on how to spend the money they have at their disposal, when money flows in from the large business rather than the small business? I expect you will find the answer is no. It would take someone extremely eccentric to colour their money such that "This money came from my small business, so I will only do good with it!" along with "This money came from my large business, so it is reserved only for evil! Muhuhahaha." In practice, money is money is money.
  - kdmccormick 3y ago
    We're talking in circles.
    - randomdata 3y ago
      No. We've never wavered from the original talk.