Why does it seem perfectly fine that a profitable business operating in a given place should be moved to achieve greater profits for the shareholders leaving the community and oft times the country that enabled it's success to deal with the aftermath? Were those employees not hardworking? Attempting to live the dream? Taking a risk by investing their future and all they had to realize the success that generated the profits for that company?
How is it that a corporation can rely on below poverty incomes for the lowest level workers while it pays their executives incomes that far exceed what most people make in a lifetime? Not only that but rely on, and plan on government programs, the safety net, to cover the shortfall in wages?
I agree with entrepreneurship and the acquisition of wealth but, not at the expense of those that are a part of the business that realizes that wealth. Can we not devise a plan that ties the top earnings to the bottom such that truly, "a rising tide will float all boats"?
Why are we so willing to cast aside the very fellow man that we see as our equals and as participants in the economic engine for the continued accumulation of wealth of the few? Do you not find it fundamentally wrong that companies advertise that the jobs they do have available are not for those that are unemployed? WTF? How can we as a society condone such actions then bemoan the fact that unemployment is still too high?
What of companies that instead of spending to retrain those within the community or even closer, within their own ranks, are willing to spend millions to search the world and entice existing talent to relocate? Do you know some of these unemployed who would gladly seize the opportunity for retraining if it were there?
How about mergers and acquisitions, driven by the mantra of diversification, that serve no real benefit to a company except to create shareholder value in the short term, these efforts have only left communities decimated and more often than not, companies in worse situations than before. No surprise when these very same companies then "shed" assets in an effort to refocus on their core business.
Are we flawed? Are the systems we have invented flawed? Yes, does that mean we accept this and do nothing to adapt and modify these systems such that we can really live up to our aspirations in accordance to the fundamental principles of most religions, and constitutions?
As for philanthropy by these organizations and their owners it represents a very small percent of their wealth and without the tax incentives would likely, be much less.
