Well i use to believe profit was a good thing.. i think it's many examples now of why it doesn't have to be.. I think gdp as a metric is an outdated measurement over the health and happiness of humanity.. For example. if i'm a business that's found a way to get rid of toxic waste by burying it some place and not paying dumping fees then i realize that over the next 10 years the environment will suffer as a result.

Then what i've done is basically taken the position of it would be "better'" for me to get rid of the toxic waste and harm the environment as i'll retain more capital.

So you may say well that's extreme and that's probably a bad idea not geared towards doing ethical or good business. You then scale that up or down and you're still on the same track of not making the world a better place. I believe profit is only good when it does both.. makes the world better and creates more resources. The problem is often times in the profit model we are getting an either or situation.. Either i fire you and not lose profits or i keep you and do regardless of what that does to the crime rate to our neighborhoods.

So i think profit is probably not the best metric of how business and government and society should run. I think you mazimize benefits by first taking care of the people. Investing in the people and in the longterm the people paying society back.

So if we take this nft thing.. marky mark selling nfts as much as $24,000.. a jpeg.. So buffet would say it's ridiculous and anyone in their right mind but he has a profit of basically about $24,000.. no workers earned anything no production was created.. nothing just air in a bottle. He thinks thats' good because it's profit.. now the guy who paid that much his chances of selling that for more money are probably slim to none. marky mark just unloaded essentially crap on somebody.. didn't make the world better didn't do anything..borderline scam

Is that good for society..absolutely not..it does no good.. only in the name of profit for the sake of profit and the same thing is what most companies are based on now.. Non human entities holding overcapitalized assets for no other reason but that So it gets complicasted but the metric is still dumb. it's why the ceo in the video did what he did because how his company was structured was the less beneficial situation for everybody in the company.

it's as dumb as saying i have a chain of restaurants and their are hungry homeless people on the street but the best alternative for me is to throw the food away because if i give it to them it has no market value.

You see how silly the reasoning has to become to maximize the best alternative for society.. Because even if you make a good argument about profit you still gotta make that argument make sense for the system to work. So i'm not saying surpluses are bad

I"m saying to set your business up on sheer profit is dumb.. The best economist in teh world would argue that the best system would be the system that gives you profit and social good. That's a system meeting it's maximum efficiency of use. .So why would anybody set up a system any different than that through deductive reasoning you just arrive at well that's stupid. i'm going to end up being the business that has to throw away tons of food just so i can sell it to this guy at a ridiculous price so the market determines it has value.

You could just as easily determined the market had value based on how many people got feed and helped and benefited.

So the argument typically is that well okay that sounds good but who's going to produce the food and what energy and etc.,.. but the level of food that can be produced is like over 10 billion people can be feed by the planet and we're still trying to fit a model that says the scarcity rate doesn't allow that to occur same as the energy .. So to get the models to work you gotta do all that lol

I'ts nonsense and malarky and most economist know that. Why? to fit an idea or concept or belief system.. a dying religion of sorts, lol. it doesn't make any sense it's just people wanting to hold on to a false nonsensical belief.