> The purpose of a corporation... to maximize returns for its investors.
That's a common misunderstanding.
"In nearly all legal jurisdictions, disinterested and informed directors have the discretion to act in what they believe to be the interest of the business corporate entity, even if this differs from maximizing profits for present shareholders. Usually maximizing shareholder value is not a legal obligation, but the product of the pressure that activist shareholders, stock-based compensation schemes and financial markets impose on corporate directors." [1]
I was really hoping to avoid going off on this tangent. To be more precise, I was comparing existing-in-perpetuity vs maximizing-investor-returns, and the latter is a more important goal. Whether corporations should prioritize morality and employee/customer interests, is a whole other discussion that is best debated elsewhere.
Lmao you're on this again. Stockholders control the company. Their goal and "purpose of a corporation" are synonyms, even if legally companies aren't forced to maximize profits. In fact, the legal requirements have nothing to do with the purpose of the company.
That's a common misunderstanding.
"In nearly all legal jurisdictions, disinterested and informed directors have the discretion to act in what they believe to be the interest of the business corporate entity, even if this differs from maximizing profits for present shareholders. Usually maximizing shareholder value is not a legal obligation, but the product of the pressure that activist shareholders, stock-based compensation schemes and financial markets impose on corporate directors." [1]
[1] https://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/academics/clarke_business_...