If I make a device that lets half of society sit on its ass for 100 years then murders everyone, I think the costs should be factored in by sueing me before everyone is dead. But maybe that's just me.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
To give an example, we should be paying more for many electronics as the result of suits against most existing companies for not dealing with Tantalum sourcing.
Getting quantitative results is entirely useless if you don't want to think about the subjective qualitative reasons we thought some arbitrary metric might matter and how they might be limited. Having a high GDP or salary is about raising your quality of life and options. If you are actively prevented from living all sorts of other lives simply because they are not as profitable then you are poorer than the wild man.
I'd say that's giving organizations rights in civil matters that only are supposed to apply to individuals in criminal ones. The end result is thousands of companies actively trying to kill us and manipulate evidence and politics for much higher profits than the ones doing net positive work.
Why do companies make profit? It's because they're offering a product or service that people buy. Why do people buy the product or service? It's because the value they get from the product outweighs the cost. What this really means is that--- all successful companies are doing social good, simply by being in business. If a company is making a big profit, they're probably doing so by providing much more value in their product than what they are charging.
Some companies produce more good than bad. Some companies produce more bad than good, but the bad is primarily not affecting their customers. The latter is inherently easier which is why civil courts must be eternally vigilant.
I agree that we should include the negative externalities in any product, and that can be done by adding taxes to products. And that we should have a healthy civil court system. And I agree that companies often get to settle for far too little. But the way you phrased your previous comment was _really_ putting the carriage before the horse.