I love cooperatives. I started one: an organic produce growers' cooperative. I also love Wealth of Nations, and I love capitalism. The company behind Gittip, Zeta Design & Development, LLC, was started in 2002 as a for-profit company and was run that way for a decade. Here's me praising corporations:
http://blog.gittip.com/post/25215503687/corporations-and-ope...
My question is, can we do even better?
----
Most advances in human history have been done by individuals who were simply passionate about a topic, and they did not do it for money. Theoretical science.
Although honestly, I think we shouldn't talk about "most" throughout history, because democracy/free trade/capitalism is pretty new, so we need to normalize for that.
Programming language, OSS, and platforms: A few friends or a lone guy/gal know they can do something way better or create a programming language or a database system more powerful than what is out there (Theory). Millions of other programmers use the language, tools and build powerful businesses such as Facebook and Twitter around it(Application). This is probably why you can do a startup today for $0 upfront cost.
I doubt Einstein spent countless hours working his brains off for money, Darwin did not go across continents to study the origin of species for money, Bethoveen did not write symphonies solely for money. Yet many other talented individuals have used their findings and made loads of money along the way.
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lists/universities.ht...
Bell Lab's had the most Nobel prizes of any for profit institution at 7. There's 13 non-for profit organization that have eight or more. Even if you drop out the political Nobels (Peace and Economics), there's still 11 entities out there besting the best that for-profit institutions have to offer. Also, most of these Nobels have been in the past hundred years, so no need to normalize out the advent of democracy.
It's true that for profit enterprises take these discoveries (e.g. Giant Magnetoresistence, MRI, Fiber Optics, CCDs) and ramp them up for mass production. However, they're still tweaking the major break-through made by people focused on things besides the personal accumulation of wealth.
As much as software patents irk common sense, the notion of IP protection really does seem reasonable here. There are people who do research for reasons beyond personal profit. They actually do deserve licensing fees.
You mean most advances in (very) recent history right? And I am a bit skeptical about the claim that companies are developed for the benefit of the people. Again, I have a problem with your generalizations. At least in our field, a lot of the research is actually publicly funded.
I think most companies exist to make money. However the "invisible hand" often leads to mutual benefit.
Not even close. Also, see the article about how cartels are an emergent property[1] of a free market. Not that there really exists a better system than what we currently have, but don't kid yourself into thinking capitalism is some kind of benevolent savior of mankind. It's just not true.
Way back in the day I decided to become a software developer instead of getting my PhD in economics. Economics didnt make any sense to me. It was all philosophy and religion. As an undergraduate, I read only one article that had even basic calculus in it. Perhaps I should have majored in physics and then got my Economics PhD., but nobody did that sort of thing.