If an ENGO wishes to retain it's tax free privileges, then it must not make
money from sales of it's services or products. Greenpeace used to have
lotteries in Canada because they were a non-profit organization. Other NGO's
still have bingo's, and auctions. Now governments are into the loto business
to increase revenues.
Some businesses have charitable commitments like McGains foods which
incidentally will not use Genetically Modified Organisms in their processed
foods. Another example is Body Shop International, it has a charitable wing,
and so do many other businesses. Shell Oil used to donate millions to
environmental groups here in Canada.
And then there are some ENGO's which make some profits from sales, but these
profits are not distributed to share holders but rather invested in the
business. Since shares in the ENGO do not exist, there can be no basis for
any profit sharing. In the Mountain Equipment COOP that I am a member of, we
used to get rebates on our purchases...but the members (one share per
person - no more) instead voted to apply 'profits' to the sale price of the
item being sold so that even first time purchases by would be less. Because
there is no profit leakage from the Coop (except donations to groups like
The Suzuki Foundation, etc.) there is more re-investment into new stores,
new product offerings, etc. Now the Coop is the largest retailer of Outdoor
Equipment in Western Canada (Mountain Equipment Coop).
MEC has one or two competitors which offer a product that serves a
different clientele: downhill skiers served by lifts. MEC does not offer
much in the way of downhill skier apparrel and equipment....but they have
the best selection of everything else for the backcountry including kayaking
equipment, etc.
There is another business called Nature's Path. They sell really good
breakfast cereal that is made from organic grains and non-genetically
modified organisms. Their price is not exorbitant either....many businesses
do good will because it can be declared as a cost of doing business and
deducted from the taxable income. So there are really blends of social
action in terms of the for profit organization and the non-profit
organization. There are extreme behaviours I guess. The Mother Teresa's of
the world, the catholic nuns of Quebec who in the past run the hospitals,
etc.
"It all depends on how you hold your mouth" [Ken Kesey, Sometimes a Great
Notion]
PS. especially when you are under water.
addios
PSS. if we never meet again
----- Original Message -----
From: Chiaviello, Anthony <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 8:55 AM
Subject: business and social action
> Well, hi,
> I've seen that long infomercial - I think it's done by Greenpeace,
> which does have a lot of expenditures, runs a couple of small ships, etc.;
> it's pretty interesting and an excellent example of effective rhetoric,
> making all the artistic appeals of Aristotle (logos, ethos, pathos). And
no
> doubt virtually all environmental groups - and all activist groups - have
> short term cash flow problems.
> I guess my point was that they are not in business to make money,
> that money is necessary for them to do business. It is a distinction with
a
> difference.
> The business of business is business: i.e., a business is there to
> make money. A enviro, politico, or any other social action group would not
> exist, do you think? if its primary objective were to make money, would
it?
> -Tc
> Anthony R. S. Chiaviello, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor, Professional Writing
> Department of English
> University of Houston-Downtown
> One Main Street
> Houston, TX 77002-0001
> 713.221.8520 / 713.868.3979
> "Question Reality"
>
> > ----------
> > From: L.M. Dangutis[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 3:19 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Global Warming motives
> >
> > Hi Tony,
> >
> > Nice to see you on line again. It seems you forgot
> > that some environmental orginizations overall, do have
> > short term profit worries. As with any business,
> > they strive to succeed, to pay employees, to work
> > on projects, whether it is more altruistic because it
> > is in the name of the environment seems a matter
> > of deeper concern. The other night, I watched a
> > fund raiser for an orginization who I shall not
> > name. The orginization was on television asking
> > people to donate only 18.00 a month due to the fact
> > funding was short, and they needed money to continue
> > progress. The orginization showed its famous save the
> > whale campaigns of the 80's. And more recently
> > pictures of starving polarbears from the Artic
> > which they could not save. My point is
> > environmentalism to some point is business orientated
> > as well. I think it is sometimes to easy to draw an
> > image of the environmentalist all honest and
> > altruistic,and forget they earn a living too,
> > sometimes by even misinterpertation of the problems at
> > hand.
> > (This is just a sidebar).
> >
> > Li-
> >
> >
> >
> >
|
