[Gud]

Again, mischaracterization.

1) what is banal about helping poor families?

2) The founding family is NOT handsomely rewarded.

3) unlike most charitable organizations, INGKA is set up in such a way to not rely on wealthy donors. They only use a small dividend of their massive fortune for charitable causes. This is financially responsible and is the only way to ensure longevity. Why is this a bad thing?

4) why it would be a bad thing for IKEA to be protected from a takeover, I don’t understand. Would you prefer some billionaire purchased it so they can pocket the profits themselves, instead of supporting poor families?

IKEA is one of the better workplaces. Unlike 99% of all the other corporations out there, IKEA uses their profits to help people in need, not enriching their already wealthy shareholders.