In these times I am minded to try to help others, but I do wonder about commercial outfits that "do that". Before all this latest disease problem started, firms such as Amazon were offering to help others (via smile.amazon) by donating a small proportion of their income to charities. Sometimes I wonder if this is just a way of the organisations which do that of boosting their own profits, by increasing total revenue, so that they can then afford to hand a fraction back to some other people.
In the meantime, some organisations which do that kind of benevolent action may in fact be engaging in business practices (e.g. wiping out competition, paying employees very low wages, etc.) which directly impacts those who may eventually receive some benefit from their charitable donations.
I don't know how one could establish a reasonable balance between motives. In the case of small to medium size companies, moves to shape the market may be done with (arguably) very good motives. There have been several record companies which have had diverse output, where just one or two people in the company have effectively diverted funds from more profitable parts in order to fund projects which they themselves wanted to have done. I can think of at least one which used funds from its better earning lines in order to fund new recordings of obscure works, or works by up and coming British composers. Accountants probably didn't approve, as that may have reduced the overall profitability of the business, but what the heck .....
In the meantime, some organisations which do that kind of benevolent action may in fact be engaging in business practices (e.g. wiping out competition, paying employees very low wages, etc.) which directly impacts those who may eventually receive some benefit from their charitable donations.
I don't know how one could establish a reasonable balance between motives. In the case of small to medium size companies, moves to shape the market may be done with (arguably) very good motives. There have been several record companies which have had diverse output, where just one or two people in the company have effectively diverted funds from more profitable parts in order to fund projects which they themselves wanted to have done. I can think of at least one which used funds from its better earning lines in order to fund new recordings of obscure works, or works by up and coming British composers. Accountants probably didn't approve, as that may have reduced the overall profitability of the business, but what the heck .....
Comment