Thanks. There should be such a comment every time someone mentions “but they have to maximise profit” and “think of the shareholder”. This point of view is not rooted in any law or legal principle and is just the Wall Street version of “might makes right”.
Yeah I think people are growing tired of this attitude. If you want to be a part of society and be a "person" in the eyes of the law you have to be a good citizen as well. Doctors have to follow a credo in addition to making $$ as do lawyers, engineers, etc. Thus it's time that if company's want to be legal "persons" they need to accept some responsibility for long term viability of their place in society beyond "shareholder value". I really hope that is a philosophy that more people take to heart.
Of course it is rooted in law, natural law. Imagine a company makes a decent profit and then decides its goal is not to make so much profit anymore? What do you think would happen? I would vouch for Parkinsons Law kicking in instantly. This would just end up in a waste of resources and misery overall
I think I see what you mean, but natural law is something else entirely. Under that framework, maximising profit for the few at the expense of the rest of society is unjust.
We could use a revival of these ideas (which were the foundation of the enlightenment) in our era of blasé cynicism.
Then, if I understood, your point goes back to “might makes right”, as in, we have the power, we might as well take the money, and to hell with long term prospects or society. It is unfortunate that these people have so much influence over the rest of us. It is also a demonstration that optimising private interests does not result in public good, that is, the invisible hand of the market is utter bollocks.