Utilising its wealth to develop people, families and communities creates a broader definition of achievement than simply paying money to shareholders. Within this wider remit lie the seeds of social nourishment and self esteem, inherent and important attributes fundamental to us all as a species.
In no way could the operation of the business be changed to nullify the necessary excitement that making the money provides, and which fulfils an important drive within us. Spreading the use to which the profit is applied outside of the business operation however, would broaden our own sense of achievement and contribute to a feeling that we are now much more masters of the money we handle, rather than its servant.
Adjusting the emphasis to include personal development of people and communities would also have a positive affect upon our collective self esteem. The provision of apprenticeships was a responsibility that business used to undertake willingly to ensure a level of quality in the products and services it provided, but now seems to have fallen by the wayside.
Any training is provided by specialist trainers and financed by the employee. I know it can be argued that this commitment by the employee is a sound measure of willingness to learn. However the perception of greed by the public puts another nail in the coffin of social responsibility versus shareholder responsibility, and the wider implications this has on an increasingly fragmented society.
Maybe another compromise between the extremes of capitalism and communism is to take out of the arena of profit those services that represent our basic necessities, such as homes, food, heating, lighting and basic forms of travel. What is left can be utilised to fulfil our hunter gatherer instincts and desire for risk.
Or maybe we need to find a completely new method by which to experience risk and reward, which does not overwhelm our well being in the manner apparent today.
In the present climate I worry that we have finally arrived at what the late Ted Heath referred to in the 60’s as "the unacceptable face of Capitalism"
1 | 2
