People vs. Profit, a Corporate Divide

Left vs. Right, a Costly Divide focused on how the endless misdirected conflict between left and right distracts us from deeper forces that shape our lives. One of the most pressing is the growing imbalance of power between corporations and ordinary people.

For much of American history, businesses were seen as engines of growth. They created jobs, introduced products, and helped build prosperity. But over time, the rules have shifted. Laws and financial practices increasingly prioritize corporate profits and political influence over the well-being of citizens.

This is not about painting business itself as the villain. Thriving companies are vital to a healthy economy. The problem arises when power becomes concentrated, accountability weakens, and the voices of the people are ignored. At that point, it isn’t just the economy at risk, it’s democracy itself.

Lobbying Rewrote the Rules

Corporate influence in politics isn’t new, but lobbying today operates on a scale the Founders could hardly have imagined. According to OpenSecrets, more than $4 billion was spent on lobbying in 2023 alone, with industries like healthcare, technology, finance, and energy among the nation’s biggest spenders.

Lobbying itself is not the issue. In a democracy, people should be able to petition the government, and lobbyists play a key role in advocating for farmers, unions, or veterans. The problem arises when corporate lobbying is so well-funded and sophisticated that it drowns out the voices of everyday citizens.

Consider pharmaceutical companies. Pharmaceutical and hospital groups are among the biggest spenders in Washington. Over the past two decades, drug makers have poured billions into lobbying Congress and federal agencies. This effort has coincided with policies that limit the government’s ability to negotiate drug prices, even as Americans pay some of the highest prescription costs in the world. For years, proposals to let Medicare negotiate directly with drug makers were blocked. Only recently have we seen movement on that front, and even then, it took decades of political battles. Citizens may grumble about those costs, but the structural power lies with companies that have the money and access to shape legislation.

And it’s not just pharmaceuticals. Telecom giants have lobbied aggressively to fight net neutrality rules. Oil and gas companies spend heavily to influence energy and climate policy. Food and beverage companies have fought labeling requirements and soda taxes. The pattern is the same: well-funded lobbying efforts buy access, frame debates, and often delay or water down regulations that would otherwise serve the public.

Financial Policies Tilt the Scale

Beyond lobbying, financial policies have further tilted the balance of power. Corporate tax rates, for example, have fallen dramatically since the 1950s, when corporations contributed about 30% of federal revenue. Today, it’s less than 10%. That shortfall is often made up through payroll and income taxes of individuals, shifting the burden onto workers and families.

Another pivotal change came in 1982, when the Securities and Exchange Commission loosened restrictions on stock buybacks. Before that, large-scale buybacks were considered a form of market manipulation. Since then, companies have spent trillions repurchasing their own shares. Buybacks inflate stock prices and boost executive pay, but they leave little for reinvestment in workers, research, or long-term innovation.

A Harvard Business Review study showed that from 2003 to 2012, S&P 500 companies used 54% of their earnings, over $2.4 trillion, on buybacks, with another 37% going to dividends. Less than 10% went into reinvestment in innovation, training, or higher wages. The result is a system where shareholder value takes precedence over nearly everything else, including employees, customers, and communities.

Profits Over People

This shift isn’t just visible in financial reports; it shows up in daily life.

Airlines cram more seats into planes while charging fees for basic services. Tech companies rush products to market, sometimes before privacy or safety concerns are addressed. Hospitals consolidate into sprawling networks, driving up costs while reducing competition.

The Boeing 737 Max tragedy shows how devastating this can be. Investigations revealed that, to keep up with Airbus and address cost pressures, Boeing rushed its plane into production, ultimately downplaying safety issues flagged internally. After two crashes killed 346 people, the planes were grounded worldwide. In the end, cost savings and speed to market had been prioritized over safety, a stark reminder of what happens when profit motives outweigh accountability.

Healthcare provides another sobering example. Consolidation has left options limited in many regions that are dominated by just one or two hospital systems. Studies show this reduces competition, inflates prices, and limits patient choice. The industry’s focus on efficiency and growth often comes at the expense of affordability and access.

While corporations spend billions on stock buybacks, millions of Americans still work without paid sick leave or fair wages. The cost if this imbalance is ultimately paid by the people.

Corporations Shape Our Culture

Corporations maintain influence not just through lobbying and financial policies but through shaping the public culture narrative and even personal identity. Marketing, public relations, and funded research often blur the line between what feels like natural social evolution and what was, in fact, cultivated for profit.

Gender norms are one instance. Many of today’s perceptions of femininity, such as favoring pink clothing for girls, reinforcing elaborate beauty standards, or driving the notion that women “should” shave their legs, were popularized not by ancient traditions or actual science but by 20th-century advertising campaigns. Companies selling razors, cosmetics, and household products strategically targeted women as a new consumer base. Over time, these campaigns didn’t just sell products; they reshaped cultural ideas of gender roles.

Food policy tells a similar story. The original U.S. food pyramid, introduced in 1992, presented grains as the foundation of a healthy diet. Yet nutrition experts have long argued that the pyramid reflected lobbying from agricultural industries as much as science. The result was guidance that encouraged high grain consumption, aligning neatly with the interests of wheat and corn producers, but not necessarily in the best interest of American health. Even after the model was replaced with “MyPlate” in 2011, decades of eating habits had been shaped by corporate pressure.

And the influence doesn’t stop with products. Media ownership shows how corporate power can conflict directly with our rights and freedoms. Just last week, late-night host Jimmy Kimmel was suspended after criticism of political figures, a move widely reported to be tied to pressure from Sinclair Broadcast Group and Nexstar, a company with a major FCC deal under review that would allow it to expand beyond current market limits. Critics argued that silencing a comedian to protect corporate interests was not just heavy-handed but a direct affront to the First Amendment. The is a stark example on how corporations can leverage their power to influence what voices are heard and what narratives are suppressed. These aren’t isolated cases. When identity, health, culture, and even speech are filtered through corporate priorities, what feels “normal” or permissible is often less a matter of public interest than of profit and power. The line between genuine choice and subtle manipulation becomes hard to see, and in some cases, disappears altogether.

Division as a Business Model

Perhaps the most troubling dynamic is how corporations profit from division. By amplifying cultural conflict, whether through targeted advertising, media sponsorships, or algorithmic amplification, they distract citizens from structural economic issues.

Social media platforms are a prime example. Companies like Meta and X (formerly Twitter) profit when users stay engaged. Algorithms reward content that sparks outrage, even if it deepens polarization, because it drives clicks and keeps users engaged. While these platforms may not set out to divide society, the business model itself thrives on it. The more divided we are, the more we click, share, argue, and engage, the more revenue is generated.

This isn’t entirely new. The early days of advertising heavily leaned on gender stereotypes, racial caricatures, and class divisions to sell products to targeted markets. But today’s technology has supercharged those tactics, and instead of magazine ads and television spots, division is now magnified in real time for billions of people. The effect is the same: while citizens fight over symbols and identities, corporations continue to strengthen their hold on wealth and power.

Corporate Rights vs. Employee Rights

The growth of corporate rights has often gone hand in hand with a steady erosion of employee rights. In the 1950s, about a third of American workers carried a union card. Today, it’s closer to one in ten. Unions used to stand as a counterweight to corporate influence, representing workers to fight for better pay, safer working conditions, and benefits that helped build the American middle class. As their numbers have fallen, workers have been left with far less leverage.

At the same time, gig work has exploded. Today, millions of drivers, delivery workers, and freelancers are expected to work without the critical safety net of traditional employment. Even people in steady jobs face less security than their parents did. Non-compete agreements keep them from moving freely to better opportunities, mandatory arbitration clauses shut them out of the courts, and pensions have been mainly replaced with 401(k)s that shift risk onto workers. All of these changes reflect decades of policies written with corporate priorities at the center.

Lobbying has played a significant role in that story. Business interests outspend labor groups by staggering margins, 16 to 1, according to the Economic Policy Institute. And it shows. Proposals for guaranteed paid time off, something nearly every other advanced economy provides, have repeatedly died under pressure from business groups warning of costs to employers. The result: the United States is one of the only wealthy countries in the world without a national standard for paid vacation or parental leave.

Minimum wage fights have followed a similar path. The federal hourly minimum wage has been stuck at only $7.25 since 2009, despite strong public support for raising it. A 2021 Pew survey found that nearly two-thirds of Americans favored a $15 minimum wage. Yet industry groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have consistently lobbied against increases, helping keep the national floor where it is.

Efforts to strengthen salary laws have faced the same kind of resistance. In 2016, an effort was made under the Obama administration to expand overtime protections to cover millions of additional workers. Business groups quickly sued, calling the rules too expensive, and a federal judge struck the expansion down before it could take effect. As labor economist Lawrence Mishel put it, “Corporate lobbies have fought overtime pay increases for decades because they cut directly into the model of squeezing more hours out of fewer workers.”

What corporations often refer to as “flexibility” or “protecting jobs” has translated into a different reality for their employees. Workers experience unstable schedules, wages that lag behind the cost of living, limited legal recourse, and benefits that are either shrinking or nonexistent. The steady pressure of corporate lobbying has kept many of the policies that could provide tangible stability, such as affordable healthcare, guaranteed sick leave, and a living wage, out of reach for millions of people.

Taking Power Back

Acknowledging the need to rebalance our power structures is only the first step and requires collective action, policy reform, and cultural shifts. While the challenges are immense, history shows that change is possible. Ways to solve for this include:

• Transparency matters. Stronger disclosure rules for lobbying and political spending would make it easier to see who is pulling the strings.
• Campaign finance reform is essential. Limiting the outsized role of money in elections would give ordinary citizens a fairer voice.
• Advocate for Workers’ rights. Expanding the right to unionize, banning exploitative non-compete agreements, and protecting gig workers would help restore balance.
• Rethink buybacks. Taxing or limiting them could push companies to reinvest in people and innovation.
• Build media literacy. Teaching citizens to recognize when narratives are driven by corporate or partisan interests can prevent manipulation.

No single law will solve this. Rebalancing requires tangible change in how we view ourselves within the broader ecosystem, not as passive consumers but as active participants in building and maintaining the guardrails of the economy.

Final Thoughts

The manufactured conflict between left and right has kept many of us distracted from the realities at play. Corporations have quietly tilted the balance of power in their favor through lobbying, distraction, and financial influence to gain a level of power that often supersedes the voices of citizens.

This is not to say that corporations are inherently evil or that profit should not matter; innovation, jobs, and growth depend on thriving companies. But when profit eclipses responsibility, and when influence outweighs accountability, the very health of democracy is at stake.

This imbalance isn’t only an economic issue; it’s a democratic one. When corporations can outspend citizens, shape policies, and influence elections, the principle of “government by the people” is weakened. Decisions that affect millions of lives end up being driven by the interests of a relatively small group of shareholders and executives.

Philosopher John Dewey once said that “politics is the shadow cast on society by big business.” His words still resonate. A system where corporations hold disproportionate influence risks eroding trust not only in the economy but in democratic institutions themselves. If corporate influence grows unchecked, people will continue to suffer under a system that isn’t built for them, but for shareholders and executives.  

If we want a society that values both innovation and fairness, both prosperity and accountability, we need to start asking harder questions about corporate power. More importantly, we need to act and demand transparency, strengthen worker rights, and refuse to let cultural fights keep us distracted from structural issues.

The choice before us is whether to keep living for the best interest of corporate America or demand change. Shifting the balance will take transparency, stronger worker protections, and a refusal to let cultural fights keep us distracted from structural problems. Power rarely shifts on its own. It shifts when citizens insist on rules that serve people as well as profits.