[flagged]
Has a company ever faced any sort of legal repercussions for sacrificing profit for moral reasons? That isn't rhetorical. I'm not aware of this ever happening, so I'm dubious of your claim.
> My ambition is to employ still more men, to spread the benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible number, to help them build up their lives and their homes. To do this we are putting the greatest share of our profits back in the business.
> A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end. The discretion of directors is to be exercised in the choice of men to attain that end and does not extend to a change in the end itself, to the reduction of profits or to the nondistribution of profits among stockholders in order to devote them to other purposes.
If this is true, it should be easy to point to some examples from the last hundred years. Because that Wikipedia article you linked makes it very clear that the conclusion you're drawing is highly debated. The disagreement is important enough to be mentioned in the second sentence in that article. The first source on the page is the actual case and the next two are both criticisms of the interpretation that you seem to very confident in.
Target is embroiled in one of such lawsuits over ESG mandates. https://www.dandodiary.com/2023/08/articles/esg/target-hit-w...
A person from a government told a person at Meta to block it, and that person did (probably by telling yet more people to do it).
It is also operated by human individuals as employees and c-suite