In 1953, the CEO of General Motors was in a congressional nomination hearing as he had been appointed by President Eisenhower to be Secretary of Defense. Did he see think that holding the government job would be a conflict of interest given his large holdings of GM stock?

I cannot conceive of one because for years I thought what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa. The difference did not exist. Our company is too big. It goes with the welfare of the country. Our contribution to the Nation is quite considerable.

This quote ties the fate of one company to the fate of the country. Since 1953, this might fit numerous large corporations that employed many people and generated large revenues. Today, this might be Amazon or Walmart or Nvidia or other influential corporations.

At the same time, people in the United States focus on particular social issues that they think require attention. Address conversation and participation on social media and life would get better. Improve schools and education and future generations have a brighter future. Add more jobs in exciting industries and people will be excited. Provide decent or good housing at affordable prices and this can lead to other opportunities. The issue of the moment might have been different years ago and it could change in the future but there are always conversations about what should be done.

Both sets of statements are reductionistic. No single company determines the fate of the United States. One social issue could affect many yet other issues might have a broader reach or have larger effects.

Companies and social problems do evolve and change over time. A number of the companies that led the way in the United States decades ago are no more. Certain social issues vexed the country years ago but may have receded from view today or the effects were ameliorated.

In other words, the conversations of today may not be the most helpful if they limit focus to just one company or social problem and even broader conversations will change in the future. This does not mean that the conversations of now are not valuable; rather, we should seek to have a broad field of vision and a sense of the current scene even as we discuss specific firms and social concerns.