so the FT thinks, in its wisdom, that social enterprises should conform more to the accepted norms of the private sector in order to be able to elicit more support (money) from the established order (see SE Livewire story here)
Well - maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't it because of the 'established order' and traditional private sector that we've had recessions, are driven by profit margins rather than balancing compassion with costs, and generally see the rise in societal inequality?
I think it should be US that's talking to the FT and its consitiency to show them that its their structures that are flawed and don't make sense - after all, on what basis should people who are already wealthy be able to invest money in companies and then sit back, do nothing, and become even more wealthy while those lower down the food chain struggle to make ends meet on a weekly, or even daily, basis?
Maybe the time for revolution is drawing ever closer... or maybe its just time for me to get down from my soapbox.
and this also links back to a published article I wrote a little while back that questions the need for our sector to rely on financig by external bodies when we've such a good track record of doing it for ourselves - link here