This isn’t an example. It’s a straw man. But I’ll bite. In what way(s) would this scenario happen “at the expense of the larger public”? What do you mean by “the larger public”? And in what way is a businessman helping himself and his shareholders at anyone’s expense? Are they somehow selling their product or service to unwilling, unwitting participants or through coercion, i.e. through threat of violence?
This is a vague assertion but I think I understand what you’re trying to say. I’d argue it’s not the selfish motivation that hurts people, it’s the result of people acting on that selfishness. Some people pursue ends that hurt themselves and others. Some people don’t. That’s human nature. I’d argue MOST people’s selfish motivations do not hurt most people. Again, I think you’re trying to build a straw man or some sort of red-herring.
Well, you’re assuming the incentives in place don’t push people towards virtuous actions. I’m not assuming that. It seems to me through mutually beneficial cooperation and free economic exchange, I can satisfy my own needs by satisfying the needs of my neighbor, no?
I don’t think anyone is advocating for dishonesty and haste nor would me acting out of my own self interest (i.e. selfishly) be incompatible with being truthful or patient. Do you see it differently? If so, how?
I did not interpret anything you said as disrespectful.