That first sentence feels like one of those fake-deep things that sounds important, but can effectively be used to justify about anything?

Which is to say, in a world that's -- you know -- a society; not screwing over the other guy is often, if not usually, a good way to "optimize your own citizens economic prospects," too.

The very first sentence crashes and burns, because there are multiple moral systems and compasses. Using "imperative" in the context of morals is extra spicy, because it reference a very specific, very strict moral code - The Categorical Imperative.

The CI is, in my experience, not a moral system about personal or group advantage, but about rules the can govern everybody.