<snip>
>>Profits lead to research & development, which leads to new technological advancements and discovery, which leads to cures. The profit motive has expidited the medical advancements that we've seen in the past few decades. In short, profits are good.
>>
>>Fundamentally, I am for less government power and more individual power.
>
>Profit *IS* GOOD, no doubt about that!
>But why does it take some high threshhold of "profit" in order to be able to fund "research"?

It doesn't. Most companies which engage in R&D have it in their existing budgets. What profits enable is expansion of the R&D.

>And where does that "profit" really go?... Isn't it mandated to go the the shareholders?

Mandated, no. Look at Microsoft's cash holdings for an example.

>Look at all the profits the oil companies have made the last few years. How much of that went into "research",

This is rather general answer, again time constraints, but here's a starting point to find out.

From ExxonMobile's form 8-K 10/26/2006, regarding the first 9 months of the year:

(in millions)
Net income
2006 : 29,250 (15% higher)
2005 : 25,420

Capital and Exploration Expenditures
2006 : 14,786 (19.5% higher)
2005 : 12,368

http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?dcn=0000034088-06-000148&Type=HTML

>and especially how much into research of alternative energy sources?

I don't have a figure for this, but I know it is going on. Especially at BP and Valero, not to mention all the new companies specifically devotes to alternatives.


>I believe strongly in PROFIT, but I have a real serious problem with greed and market manipulation in order to fulfill that greed. Imagine the drug lobby succeeding in getting a clause ito the senior's drug benefit scheme that forbids trying to extract 'bulk discounts' for drugs!!!

We agree that market manipulation is bad, however, one can be greedy legally as well. In that instance I believe greed is good.