Well the way I read your initial post was that you did reject the profit motive. Although at this point I should ask, why not? I quoted Adam Smith in my first post to show how everyone's "greed" satisfies what everyone wants and creates an economic system. But you implicitedly rejected the concept of any such system didn't recognize anything in the least bit natural as to how a market works.
So given that, why tolerate the profit motive? I mean, what do you require to have a "stable society and citizenry?" Can you conceive of a way of doing that without the profit motive?
Criticism is not an unequivocal indictment. It can be in some instances, but I'm not rebuking the whole of capitalism. I never was. I can criticize (even heavily) many things and that's not a pronouncement of patent dismantling of, or revocation of, that which I take issue with.
I think you see any criticism as an entire incrimination and that's not what I've been saying. I thought, in-between my babbling (my apologies), my entire undercurrent was how I was heavily criticizing destructive capitalism, not capitalism. They are separate. Perhaps to you, they are not...and if that's the case...then we're not going to find any middle ground for discourse.
