My friends in business would find this table of profit-taxation interesting.
UAE was a surprise.
Germany at ~30% and India at ~35% are bangers on corporate profits.
As an SME owner, I've had the enriching experience of steering my companies through many difficult times. Few are so hard to overcome as the classical cashflow bottlenecks. You know you will have it available in 2 weeks, when that one client will pay, but there is payroll to process tomorrow.
Managing those bottlenecks, as an entrepreneur, your main goal of running an enterprise, to make a decent profit, remains a secondary aftermath, never actually knowing how the year would close.
Often, the balance-sheet refers to a profit, but there isn't an actual cash-balance to pay it out to the entrepreneur.
I have seen this happen in my SMEs over a decade of operations, before a simple idea occurred, of "putting the horse in front of the cart", in other words, putting profit before cashflow. We have since started to book a certain percentage of our revenue into a dedicated bank account (which we call our "diet account"), as soon as customer payments flow in, and forget about it.
Which percentage of put-away you transfer to the diet-account depends on you expectation of profit as an entrepreneur, sector-specific benchmarks, your intuition of operating your business etc. Pick a reasonable percentage.
An important hack is to make sure that the diet-account does not have access by online banking or mobile-banking, isn't accessible to your accountant, and as much as possible concealed from your chattered accountant doing monthly tax filings. You will be protecting your profit for the daily operative cash requirements better this way!
I have been practicing this simple, almost household-sophistication, method for 3 months in one of my companies as of date of publication, and am already seeing accessible profits accrue.
There are of course 2 sub-challenges yet to overcome.
1. Make sure that the balance-sheet also shows more or less similar figures.
2. Sustain the practice over 1-2-3 years, to actually prove the merit of this procedure.
At some point, this profit-centered method has an inevitable impact on the operations of the SME, forcing it's managers to ensure a positive cashflow inspite of guaranteed profits.
While planning the strategy for a new business, before starting to execute, ask the following questions. They are sort of a Litmus Test for if we should enter the market or not.
1. Are you disrupting your market?
2. Do you have resources to deliver?
3. Can you sell enough to grow?
4. Filled out the Business-Model-Canvas?
Zeitgeist was eye-opening enough, and along with the Venus Project, inspiring. But while both concepts did a great job of painting a picture of a utopian future, neither helped to connect in my mind the present world-order, with that Utopia.
That being such, here're a few things that could improve living conditions, at least in the industrialized world.
Nationalize following industries:
1. Food production, processing and distribution.
2. Research, production and distribution of medicine.
There are a few necessities for life - air, water, food, shelter, medicine, education, security and some would argue information (facilitated by Internet). A society aspiring for a "high standard of life", could aspire to guarantee these basics to itself.
Essentially, these industries should remain outside the domain of profit-making.
While the above sounds utopian at it's own level, it leaves the key question of innovation open. Can the public-sector in these "necessary industries" produce innovation (like NASA and the BBC), comparable and better useful than the private-sector?
Gepostet von Ashant Chalasani an 11:32 am
I haven't presented my argument yet.. :)
I find the views above, Bhagat's included, being based on a single snapshot in time and socioeconomic cross-section. The conditions have of course evolved over a larger time-span, differently for many types of women, and must be addressed as such. Say what you say, do what you do, you won't be able to change the present social conditions for the "modern" woman. It's too late - these circumstances were programed over 50-100 years ago for you. Here's what happened:
Long long ago, physical work provided food and shelter. Men have more physical energy hence controlled those emenities. Some 49,900 years passed like that. Same pattern in all cultures: men work/till/hunt, women care for home & family. Time to time, people had amusing debates and serious fights alike, about which activity was more important. But men dominated for sure (hence such terms like "partiarchical societies" got introduced into common language).
Plus-minus 100 years ago, whatever reason triggered that, women started to ask questions like: Who are these SOB men to dominate us? Can't we do more, outside the home? Equal rights sounds only fair - why can't we have em? Thus began an unprecedented evolutionary event that unleashed the energies and talents of the woman - that's half the human resource, about whichever social cross-section we debate!
It turns out, an unlikely social component took maximum advantage of that event, and actually controls it till date: Industries. Industries realised, we can use all this (wo)manpower (and in recent years brainpower). Women got themselves educated, became independent, and felt more empowered. Industries benefited due to expansion of the workforce. They encouraged the education system to train more. This was all btw. thanks to western societies. Left to themselves, oriental societies _may have evolved differently.
I guess this was what got called Emancipation. So far so good - mission accomplished. But there was one problem. Mothers were starting to see their kids less than they would like every waking day. And the other way around is true too - kids spend more time with strangers like teachers, classmates etc than mom.
This puts the whole concept under the microscope again. The modern woman asks, "am I better off at home, or in an office?" Do I have 2 legs in 2 boats? Oh wait, I have to work, coz we need the money, and also, I'd like to preserve my independence (read $€Rs.) Besides I didn't put myself through 16+ years of education to "stay home".
This is where the "industry controls it" point comes. Here in the western world, and increasingly in India, double-incomes are quasi-mandatory, if you wanna live a "normal" life. By the time you have paid off insurances, the home-loans-till-retirement, kids education, a few niceties to sweeten life, set a tiny little aside for the rainy day, you are waiting for another check from the industrialist.
You all know, that in our parents' generation, all these things were possible in a single income, and they never carried debt.
So Mr. Bhagat may expand his bullet-points into a few books, to cover the under-the-surface complex matter.
I don't think Emancipation or Women's Liberation is a inherently negative. But I ask myself, if it ever took off in the right direction.
In the meantime, believe it or not, the hunting and gathering apes called "modern men" have evolved too. But that's a story for another day!
Gepostet von Ashant Chalasani an 11:44 am
Couldn't help wondering why the tears wouldn't stop while watching Satyamevajayate (on crime in Indian politics). They were for the sadness of the heritage of our freedom-fighters being squandered, the courage of those standing up and putting up a fight against the evil, the disappointment at those who didn't understand the evil, and for the hope of someday overthrowing it.
Gepostet von Ashant Chalasani an 10:14 am