@Manigarm There is the problem that corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. For publicly traded companies they will be hearing from lawyers if they intentionally leave money on the table. This problem doesn't go away until the profit motive goes away.

Update: I have been corrected on whether or not that fiduciary responsibility is legally enforceable. Fine. They will still hear from their investors if they intentionally leave money on the table, and the problem still doesn't go away until the profit motive goes away.

@edyother that doesn't work the way people think it does. It's absolutely not true that companies can be sued if they don't maximize profit. The legal duty to shareholders is not to negligently disregard shareholder value (such as by not bringing a purchase offer to the shareholders to consider)

Boards can absolutely decide to make less profit on the assumption that sustainable business is better value than short-term growth

The legal duty almost never comes up. The issue is greedy investors that get responsible boards fired and replaced (voted out, not sued). That's the fear that drives the "perpetual growth" mindset.

@Manigarm

@edyother @calcifer @[email protected] of depends on the ethics of who is able to invest...

In the past I have invested in what I thought were socially responsible companies. I saw Phillip Morris making double what my little clean energy picks were doing, but didn't invest in that.

But I'm a normal human being: a small time individual investor simply looking for long term security. I (and I would argue millions of other healthy humans) have mindsets very different from the big (stunted greedy) groups of sociopaths that are the largest players.

I'm mostly out now because I have come to the reluctant conclusion that businesses who go public public rarely stay clean enough for my tastes.