Companies have many incentives and they play out in different ways. It's possible to have that result in some things that you think are good and some which you don't. At a certain size, there is no longer a unified set of values holding everything together and inevitably, some values will clash with yours. Lumping everything into one pile is dramatic.
There is, but the financial net result is only known with hindsight. Exactly which actions boost the net result in a particular time frame always remains uncertain.
Also, the people who work for corporations have their own goals and net results, such as promoting their own careers or self esteem.
Shareholders may wish for a single minded, deterministic, profit seeking machine but that is not a possibility. Capitalism just provides vague, incomplete and even contradictory incentives.
>There is, but the financial net result is only known with hindsight.
I mean a net result regarding the impact it has on society.
>Shareholders may wish for a single minded, deterministic, profit seeking machine but that is not a possibility.
Yes, but my point is not based on some total purity of absolute profit seeking.
It's enough that we can observe for 20 plus years now actions with harmful intentions and harmful effects, primarily motivated and explained by profit seeking.
It doesn't have to be Google's (or any companys or organizations) absolute and only priority, nor everybody has to be single-mindedly going for it all of the time, Google doesn't even have to be totally effective in this goal for them to perform profit-increase-oriented harmful actions.
I mean, it's such a pedantic point! What you wrote is common sense, and it wasn't contended. I didn't paint them as pure-profit-seeking-pure-evil-nothing-else.
Just as an actor that causes harm in pursuit of its profit-seeking.
