I would argue, rather, that what is good for corporations generally has little correlation with what is good for all of us. It could be a sign of a booming economy. A sign that consumers have lots of money to spend. A sign that products have become so cheap as to improve everyone's quality of life even if their income didn't increase. It could also mean unchecked worker exploitation. Not paying workers based on productivity per-worker, but underpaying by exploiting job desperation. It could mean extensive tax evasion. It could mean price fixing, price gouging, a monopoly, or other captive consumer exploitation. In the case of healthcare, private prisons, and military contractors, their business model exists only because human suffering does. The point of regulation is to try, where possible, to force business interests to align with public interest.

What's good for the most successful corporations is the following: cheapest product in its classification sold for the highest amount. That, objectively, cannot the best thing for everyone.

There's something rather bizarre about seeing a homeless person huddled underneath the shelter of a skyscraper owned by some billionaire.

This is absolutely not the case. What is good for all of us Is for the spirit of capitalism to flourish in our villages and town centres. Such places have become, or are becoming, places full of pizza, charity and coffee shops, seldom visited and seldom centrally lived in places devoid of all character. Major corporations that produce large amounts of profit to employ people who would otherwise be employed by, or be the owner of, small and local inner-town businesses, are destroying the fabric of British society. By pandering to the interests of large corporations, all character is being drained from our society, and towns and villages become robotic institutions where all people are forced into conformity as wage slaves to overbearing corporations.

It is generally better when a lot of different types institutions are balancing each other out, because each has certain virtues and certain vices. Large corporations create a lot of material prosperity for most people but tend to create great disparities which lead to jealousy and thus certain types of social strife. Without them everyone would be in extreme poverty but would be equally poor. Perhaps they should be reformed a bit, but overall raising up institutions that have lost power makes more sense to me.