It is not an easy game, there are many many variables including all the externalities derived from any corporation producing and serving a market. I agree something has to change as the rich/poor breach keeps growing but the internal goods a company produces or serves are not the only gain. There are the employees, which is a direct consequence, but also the consumption around the corporation such as logistics, and hospitality.
I remember several years ago when some groups where protesting about the governmental help the Barcelona F1 circuit was getting to organize one of the championship races. It is true that you could see that money as a waist since there are other probably more important areas where it could be spend than on a F1 race organization, but there is such a huge impact on local business around that event with restaurants, hotels, car rentals, tourism around the city, flights and so on. The argument was that the economical inflows were way bigger than the money given to the organizers of the F1 event.
Everything is so interconnected that it is hard to isolate one variable thinking that the rest of the system is going to behave the same except for the change of that variable, but I agree that we need a completely new system as the one we are using is based on the past, not the present nor future.
Yes, this interconnectedness is actually the strength of it, but the weakness is only realised when the wealth is in too few hands. Using the F1 example, while it is good for many local providers, the biggest earners are likely the large conglomerates who don't even pay their taxes in Spain. The hotel chains and food providers with parent companies in tax havens etc.