> Non profits strive to place human outcomes over financial results. Most corporations are either unwilling or unable to do so, beyond what is required by law.

> Non profits strive to place human outcomes over financial results. Most corporations are either unwilling or unable to do so, beyond what is required by law. This is incredibly reductive. A non-profit can strive to place human outcomes over financial results, but nothing requires them to, and there are plenty of forces that push them in the other direction as well. Conversely, for-profit corporations might not strive to place human outcomes over financial results, but nothing prevents them from doing so[0], and some in fact do. The "non-profit" vs. "for-profit" distinction tells you literally nothing about a company's ethics. [0] Every time this topic comes up, someone brings up Dodge v. Ford, which (a) is not the most relevant precedent, even in Michigan law; (b) does not actually establish the precedent that people citing it usually thinks it does, even in Michigan law, (c) was soundly rejected in other states shortly after the Michigan decision, and (d) has since been overturned (in the part that is relevant here) in Michigan.