That is the legal fiction.
You're emphasizing the legal.
You've forgotten the fiction part of it.
What you’re saying is this: Business requires “virtue, which guides us in creating those organized human interactions we call institutions.”
Uh, you just provided the definition of Social Justice according to The Association for Business Communication.
Nope. YOU just put words in my mouth, and then played with your own strawman.
I have a personal and moral responsibility to help people whenever I can (which I do). As a CEO (which I am), it is not appropriate for me to spend other people’s money on social issues, regardless of how worthwhile they are.
Uh huh. Tell that to the wokescolds who took over Chik-Fil-A.
(I do note that your response mentioned women's bathrooms at Target: on which we agree.)
As you said,
As an aside, my company is not responsible for ensuring welfare payments, paying social costs or school costs for for emergency rooms. I think that falls under the “common welfare” which is political, not business-related — personal, not corporate.
But that isn't accurately describing my point.
In fact, you're switching black and white. Since you're only used to dealing with other businessmen, who tend to be sociopathic herd creatures anyway, you think that by jumping up and down and spitting wooden nickels, you'll intimidate me.
What happens is, modern corporations have changed the rules of the social contract, in midstream. In multiple ways.
Most of them are complete parasites.
Look for example at the merger of Cabela's / Bass Pro shops. Done by corporate raiders who got (I think) at 10% stake in the voting stock, and forced the companies to merge, eliminating around 2000 jobs in a small town without any major employers.
I think the raider company arranging the merger walked off with $90 million.
But the people left behind -- their lives are in ruins.
They may need public assistance, social services, the gamut.
None of that would have been necessary, if the corporate raider hadn't found a way to make themselves rich with other peoples' money:
the companies were NOT failing, it was not "rescue of distressed assets"
Merely naked, inexcusable greed, from outside, unasked.
In other words, the company is not responsible for "paying" the social welfare costs.
But by their actions, they CREATED the social welfare costs, where there didn't used to be any.
The people were honestly, happily, productively working.
Until someone like you came along.
Notice how President Trump *created* jobs and prosperity, he didn't just suction OFF wealth, and blame the people robbed for deserving it?
That's why he's popular.