Investment capital is most profitable where labor is squeezed, because that widens the gap between labor costs and turnover. You get investment capital interested in return on investment if it is privately owned. But you can also put capital in the hand of someone who is judged by the people as to what kinds of businesses it lets emerge through investment, while denying that person to bear either the profits or losses of the investment. That is what is being proposed here: community controlled investment, where the investor is a service agent who gets a wage for its effort, while the capital is put together from fees/taxes/donations of the members. In a real democracy/republic (perhaps not to be confused with todays 'democracies'), the obvious - but by no means the only one for the sake of diversity and pulling power away elsewhere! - is the Government, particularly local Governments.

This system also exists as a form of economic warfare: put funds together and control it as outlined, and then invest in a business on condition that it democracizes per the system outlined here (see Constitution chapter 6). That will roll back tyrannical business practices in the nation, although it may be a long struggle ahead because the tyrannical businesses may react with a boycott and other games (particularly the banks may engage in destructive practices).

Example: A group of people decide they have had it with exploitive practices, and the set up a fund, donate to it, decide together on where to invest it.

Example 2: The government is ordered to engage in economic warfare against a business which has been engaged in bad practices such as abusing employees, selling inferior products on lies. The Government installs a killer-competitor, knowing that this will probably destroy mentioned operation. 1 week later mentioned business has liquidated itself knowing it can't win.