Besides, most of us here on Hacker News can easily avoid big companies and go work at small start-ups or even our own businesses. If you hate the Machiavellian corporate world then vote with your feet.
I think using the word evil to describe anything in economics is a bit overly emotional. But then again, I don't think what you're describing is even possible, so whether it's "evil" or not is a moot point. Even fatcat investors thousands of miles away from factories are contributing to the production with their capital and the organization and financing of the systems of production, so the concept of a "pure extractor" that you believe to be evil never exists in the first place.
If you want to find wiggle room with the word "directly" in "directly producing", then you're inviting a purely subjective argument that will eventually leave you on the evil end of the morality spectrum from someone else's point of view.
I'm not sure what you're referring to, but I'm fine with agreeing that is not morally defensible. The Tucker Carlsons of the world are behaving as close to indisputably evil as possible, but I wouldn't lump them in with every business owner that is extracting more value than they're directly producing with their own hands on a daily basis.
I suppose for a company that's better than attracting managers who work their butts off to do nothing but enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else?
It just depends on who really holds the power at the company - the people who want a return on investment (the company to succeed), or the people who want to extract as much value from the company for themselves (the execs).
When companies start making decisions left and right that don't make any sense - it's not because execs are morons. It's because things are working as intended, and the execs are extracting value for themselves at the expense of everything else.