• FoolishOwl
    link
    fedilink
    108 months ago

    @SuperSynthia @dvdnet62 Because for capitalism, profit is not the end, only a means to the end. The end is to accumulate sufficient capital to absorb all competitors and achieve total control of markets.

    • @accideath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      28 months ago

      Yea but like, their competitors, when it comes to operating systems are Apple, which isn’t anywhere near small enough to be obtainable by anyone and Linux and Linux-Derivatives, which are also unobtainable due to their open source nature.

      • FoolishOwl
        link
        fedilink
        28 months ago

        @accideath The point isn’t whether Microsoft will reach that end. The point is that like all capitalist enterprises it will forever strive to do so.

            • @accideath@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              -18 months ago

              Not every larger company is automatically evil, just because they exist within a capitalist market. A lot of them are, sure. At least to some extent. But there still are privately owned enterprises that do have a conscience.

              Also, calling them “capitalist” enterprises seems redundant.

              • FoolishOwl
                link
                fedilink
                38 months ago

                @accideath I’m calling them capitalist enterprises to emphasize that they are capitalist enterprises. They accumulate capital. That is what they are and defines what they do.

                A capitalist enterprise does not decide it has enough and can retire and take up gardening. It is not a person. It does not have a conscience.

                • @accideath@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -18 months ago

                  A privately owned enterprise can. Publicly traded ones can’t. A privately owned enterprise also doesn’t need to make more money, if the owner doesn’t want that. A publicly traded company that has to answer to its shareholders has to make more money and to keep growing to appease said shareholders. If you don’t have shareholders you don’t have to do anything like that. That doesn’t mean, of course, that any privately owned company is automatically good – many aren’t – but it does mean that they have the capability to not be evil.

                  • FoolishOwl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    28 months ago

                    @accideath We started by talking about Microsoft, and I was explaining that there’s no such thing as “enough” profit for a capitalist enterprise.

                    There are many organizations that are not capitalist enterprises. There are small businesses and cooperatives where the owners deliberately keep profits low. The small business doesn’t have a conscience; the owners may. And it leaves them vulnerable. Small businesses destroyed or absorbed by larger ones is the third oldest story in capitalism.