zlacker

> "prioritize profits and growth over human and societal well being"

As in: what every corporation is, by law, required to do. If it doesn't, lawsuits follow.

>>mpweih+(OP)
If you're talking about fiduciary duty, one, that only applies to public companies, and two, no, that's not what it means. (For instance, the Supreme Court has recently stated, "Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.")

>>mpweih+(OP)
No, they are not. This myth needs to die already.

>>mpweih+(OP)
No, that's a myth. Look it up, fiduciary duty does not involve duty to maximize profits no matter what. There's no such law and the laws that exist give the management very wide leeway in how the company is managed, as long as it is not overtly subverting company's resources for one's own (or somebody else's own) benefit to the detriment of the company. As long as you have a plausible argument that it's for the good of the company, in a very wide understanding of it, it's fine with the law.