Don't fall for that kind of groupthink. "The rich" don't exist. Only individuals can act.
So, if you want to punish the profiteers of the Federal Reserve System, I think you get many support here. But that can't be done by putting a tax on everybody that is rich, because there are some rich who became rich by offering a good product. Further, you can't do it with a tax at all, because this is a durable punishment. If somebody committed theft, you don't put a tax on him. Instead you impose a fine on him to pay back what he stole. That is exactly what should be done and not "tax the rich".
By arguing against the current business trends, you come close to the arguments of a socialist. If you don't like what other people do, you have every right to do it better on your own. But you don't have the right to force others to do what you think is right. Only because you don't like what they're doing doesn't this make it wrong in any sense.
However, the real problem here can be found in the government, again. The government eliminated the competition of small and medium-sized businesses and there is so much money wasted only because they have to pay for things the government forces them to do.
Finally, there is also an economical fallacy in your argument with HenryFord.
If Ford decides to pay his workers above market price he has every right to do that. However, by saying that this is good, you only look at this from the perspective of the workers, but not from a neutral one. From a neutral perspective, this behaviour can't be classified as good or bad.
The money he pays his workers more, can't be used to buy other things, which would instead pay other workers a higher wage or could hire new ones. Even if Ford decided to hoard his money and not putting it into the bank, some prices would go down and somebody would profit from that, too.
So there is no good or bad from a neutral point of view. Don't fall for the socialist propaganda! By only paying somebody more money, no wealth is created. It just drives the prices of some things up while decreasing the prices of other things that would have been bought instead.