Corporation under sapitalism vs. socialism

After searching the database, there is an interesting fact. Consider the 500 largest U.S. companies in 1957, only seventy-four were still part of the current S&P 500. Ouly a few disappeared in mergers; the rest either shrank or went bust. Note that the S&P 500 almost all located in the U.S.

Why did capitalism destroy them? Is it because economic freedom would let competitions keep companies in check. But why the 74 companies can still around? Did they find a blockbuster product so that they can last that long? That seems odd because you got to do that consistantly, otherwise you would be displaced. That could be an accumulative effect such as too big to fail. That also could be pure luck but luck is not as a single convincing argument.

On surface, capitalism encourages all sorts of possibilities above. But if the social orientation changes from capitalism to socialism, can companies last as long as the social system? The answer is almost certain positive. When a social system doesn't encourage competition, the big guys get even bigger. Bigness has its own problems too: less efficient, less productive, and the like. Thus, bigger ones tend to be mediocre. But it won't fail quickly as its symbolic status. Eventually it becomes staggnant. To find ways to revitalize is not an easy task.

So it is a tale of growth, dynamics, and consistency.