I've thought in the past about the possibility of a network of enterprises that would seek to eliminate or at least minimise profits and to exclude profit making companies from participation in the network. For example, the Goldman Sachss of this world would find the doors firmly shut via some kind of legal structuring. The eventual goal would be to drive profit out of the system completely, which surely would convert all profit into pure inefficiency, and thus slowly destroy the profit making enterprise as a viable model. Intrigued therefore to see this and also a report on TV about how Hamburg voted (narrowly) to take back control of their electricity network, and how this has the big power companies seriously concerned, no doubt because their parasitic extraction of profit is threatened.
As may be obvious I am not an economist, so anticipate and welcome the flaws in my idea being pointed out!
Forcing out profit means there is less money for reinvesting. This would mean your network would fall behind in the quality it provides, until the profit enterprises are a better deal, even after their profit is extracted.
You could go against that by having the intention of turning a profit but committing to reinvesting, but that is still extracting that profit. Moreover, it encourages the same exploitative behavior.
In general, profit isn't bad. Trades are only made when both parties are better of afterwards, so in principle, more trade means everyone is better off. The devil lies in the balance between how much better off both parties are.
OK, so then include a percentage of price for reinvestment and eliminate all other profit? Or put all of this profit into a socialised pool? Also for-profit competitors would be effectively shut out of the network by agreement. The vision would be vertical integration with minimal profit at each step, thus opportunities for concentration of wealth are minimised. Interestingly this seems to be happening to a degree with Amazon, where profits are arbitraged out of the system (though to varying degrees between participants).
As may be obvious I am not an economist, so anticipate and welcome the flaws in my idea being pointed out!