>>189079, >>189080, >>189081, >>189082, >>189083, >>189084, >>189085, >>189086, >>189087, >>189088, >>189089, >>189090, >>189091, >>189092
Profit performs the not-at-all-magical (see the ecosystem of birds and bees, flowers and trees above) magic trick of turning working to produce solutions to other people's problems into self-interest. This is literally the glue that holds societies together. That is, once you get beyond very small, very tight networks built on other kinds of affective bonds, profit is what makes society work (as is the case in all ecosystems ever anywhere always).
So, profit is the glue that holds society together because it incentivizes people to come up with solutions to other people's problems, even if they don't know or care about those other people. This in turn promotes peace because people want to live and work in a stable situation where everyone can do this for themselves. It also holds society together even more effectively than politics and identity can, and more broadly. It also incentivizes solving problems, especially scalable problem-solving. If you want a successful, productive society worth living in, it's held together and incentivized by profit. This is profoundly moral and practical.
Profit actually does more, though. It seems magical because it's unplanned, but it's actually not magical and just fundamental common sense that even birds, bees, flowers, and trees follow without any real planning capabilities.
For example, profit encourages abundance but without waste. Flowers don't make more nectar than will attract pollinators because it would be a waste of energy that could be used for other purposes (including developing their fruits, growth, etc.). Nature does not reward waste. The same cuts the other way. This fact is even more obvious with profit, guided by human reason, though.
If you can make something for $5 and sell that thing for $10, you have a $5 incentive per unit to make more than you personally need. If you can sell 1000 units, you're incentivized to produce 1000 extra units beyond your needs because you'll pocket $5000. That's called surplus. It's called abundance. It is the only thing that generates and spreads wealth.
You're not incentivized to make 1000 surplus items at a cost of $5000 to you to make them just to make them. No one (except lunatics) would be. You're incentivized to make 1000 extra things at a cost of $5000 to you because you can reliably sell them for $10000 and pocket the extra $5000, which you can then use however you like to meet your other needs and wants.
So, you're incentivized to make a surplus by profit, but there's more.
For one thing, you're only actually incentivized to produce a surplus of useful things (useful to other people who will buy them at a price that gives you a greater return on your investment). That's pretty "magical." Flowers don't exude poisons to attract pollinators. They exude nectar, something pollinators want and will exchange effort that results in pollination to obtain.
Profit doesn't just encourage surplus; it actually encourages abundance: the production of surplus of things people actually want.
For another, because there's more, profit discourages excess. If you can sell 1000 units, you won't make 2000 units just to make them. If you do, you'll pay a price. The price is your costs to make them. If we use the numbers above, it would cost you $10000 to make 2000 units, and when you sell all 1000 you can sell, you're stuck with 1000 units in inventory and broke even by bringing in $10000 in cash. Your incentive isn't good here. You wouldn't do it (twice).
That is, profit also encourages producing the right amounts of useful things and not more. Do you have any idea how valuable and important that information is? Profit does it without ANY planning whatsoever because societies and their economies work on the logic of ecosystems.
15