Thanks for your response. I think you coherently laid out a particular point of view.

I'm planning a longer response as a second point of view but in the meantime.

1) Doing good and making a profit are not mutually exclusive.

2) Doing good is only a subset of "long term view." A long term preserves the health of the business over a long time span, and that includes such things as protecting the environment purely out of self interest.

3) The shareholders are already screwed. For example, they have to cope with accelerating environmental degradation. Maybe they can spend all of their profits on air conditioning or berms or increased medical costs due to excessive heat or rising prices due to drought.

4) It's unethical to favor the interests of shareholders over non-shareholders when your company's actions harm non-shareholders.

5) Not sure where you are going with "doing okay with water and dumping stuff." We are in a severe environmental crisis. The situation is getting worse not better. Things may be moving in the right direction but not quickly enough to stave off disaster.

6) "Risking retirement" implies that most shareholders are Mom and Pop. Institutional investors aren't risking retirement.

7) Yes, promising investors a gain makes sense. Limiting the concept of gain to only money, vs.money among other gains, is not creative or necessary.