I'm sorry but your premise about the corporate funds is plainly wrong. You did give it an effort though. They are not directly nor indirectly accessible by all of the corporations employees. I'm sorry that you are wrong but you are.
But I’m
not wrong.
Employees of a corporation
do have indirect access to corporation funds...via their paycheck, at the very least.
They do not
control those funds, except through how they do their jobs, which affects the company to a degree, depending on its size.
And it would be reasonable to assume as much.
Excellent, we agree on that at least.
OK, now the question is: Who does the economy serve? The People or Corporations?
Both, as they are one and the same.
Do we simply allow corporations to do anything they want to improve their profitability regardless of the damage it might do to "The People" either directly (i.e. poisoning a community's water supply) or indirectly (i.e. causing banking failures)?
Obviously, some actions a corporation makes can cause harm to individuals or communities. Additionally obvious is that those actions can be attributed to individuals working for said corporation. Our laws against such need reinforcement in some places, and perhaps rewriting (i.e. legislation) in others. And such laws need to be strictly enforced. Consequences need to be known and harsh, to discourage corporations from doing such.
Obviously we do not just simply allow corporations "to get away with" damages but only if caught. We rarely do anything proactively to PREVENT corporations from doing damage. This is because the corporate lobby controls our legislature. We only attempt to fix damages by legislative fingers in the dam. Those fingers are of course directed by corporate interest and in all cases that I am aware of, end up opening other doors or the "fixes" are short lived and overturned or "refixed" to open a door by the congress at some later point when less people are scrutinizing.
This is not a problem of corporations. This is a problem of politicians.
Sure, corporations might be influencing politicians to an extent, and in some cases, a great extent. Their constituents need to fire them, if necessary.
But corporate influence of politicians is simply a extension of individual influence, namely by those who control said corporation.
To take away the use of their funds is to take away part of their free speech.