[PLUG-TALK] RE: [PLUG] Kylix?

[Miller, Jeremy]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craighead, Scot D [mailto:craighead.scot at vectorscm.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 9:47 AM
> To: 'plug-talk at pdxlinux.org'
> Subject: [PLUG-TALK] RE: [PLUG] Kylix?
> 
> 
> Jeme:
> >Why limit yourself to the narrow confines of "business" and it's
> >one-sided, destructive notions of success?
> >.

I just want to pop in and say that I see "limitations and narrow confines"
in your definition as well.

I myself may have a few ill feelings about some businesses, but don't
believe business in general is "evil" or anything like that.  Or even that
more than a few are.

"This is a dog.  It has three legs." isn't the same as "All dogs have three
legs".  Anyway...


> >.
> >.
> >Again, I say we should really start looking at alternatives 
> to business
> >for valid means of social interaction.


I think valid means of social interaction include everything one can do to
interact with others without causing them harm.  I'd say this doesn't
exclude business, and already includes many alternatives to business.  It's
not "either-or".


> Why do you view business as evil?  Is a hammer evil?  It 
> could be used to
> save a life or to take one.


Quite true.  Though more often than not, it just drives nails.  :P


>  I could be used to make 
> something that benefits
> people, or make thing that hurts.

OK, enough silliness from me, here's where I differ...

>  A business is something 
> that is created
> by investors to make money back for the investors.  That's 
> all it is.

I have to really stretch my usual image of "investors" to make this
definition work for me... but I can see how it would still fit the scenarios
I'm imagining.

>  No
> one says, "Let create a business so that there will be more jobs for
> people".

Not true at all.  I've seen people say exactly that.  Though I admit, the
jobs they are referring to are their own.  However this often extends to
family, and sometimes friends.

A lot of my collateral experience (meaning people I've known, not myself)
tend to be in the realm of small and family businesses.  (Contractors,
construction, steel-fab shops, ranches and farms, timber, small practice
doctors and dentists, etc.)  Quite often the reason for starting a business
is for both employment and income, primarily of the founder and sometimes
for persons around them.  (One could argue that this income=investment
return, and the founder is the investor.  So I guess that definition still
works.)

Many people in small businesses have a lot of contact with other small
businesses, sometimes including personal friends.  They trade
work/skills/money all the time as a regular part of business.

And you'd be suprised how often someone who is doing well will take one
job/contract/whatever over another because they know someone who needs
work/business that would be a perfect fit.  

(ie, there's always work for subcontractors, and if a contractor buddy needs
work and you have an opportunity to do a project where he'd be perfect for
part of it, it's not a bad idea to take it.  Help out the economy, in pure
financial terms.  There may come a time when you need help, and it may come
back to you.)


>  A business is just a type of tool, no more and no less.


Yep.  BUT, there are no limitations on how one may choose to use ones'
tools.  I just wanted to argue that sometimes, this tool is actually used
specifically for putting other people to work and giving them some income.


Essentially I'm just saying "Never say Never".  And arguing silly details
with everyone in sight because it's Monday and I need more coffee. :)


Jeremy Miller


> _______________________________________________
> PLUG-talk mailing list
> PLUG-talk at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-talk
>