>"Businesses that cannot afford to retain talent and remain competitive deserve to not survive, in order to make room for more efficient organizations. "
Reads like maximalist statement with zero clues about the subject.
This is basic concept of the free market. it is valid to reject this concept. The free market is basically a religion in the US.
However if you reject this ideal which is the western worlds baseline, then you really have to provide some info on what framework you are arguing from…
Because "free market" does not exist. In "free market" you will end up with few majors owning everything else and controlling people's lives. We have various regulations that among the other protect small companies to a point and are trying to keep the huge ones in check. Things are slowly deteriorating lately in favor of big corps as they have government in their pockets but hopefully it is not yet irreversible. There is much more to discuss about "free market" and that naive "survival of the fittest" look at it but I am in no mood and am not qualified to write essays about the subject.
Which is why if you read the second part about my comment above, free markets are regulated. It's a no true scotsman to appeal to the purity of free market semantics when nobody else is using language limited to the literal definition.
Reads like maximalist statement with zero clues about the subject.