It's people who own and run businesses, and it's not unethical for people to want to put themselves in a better financial situation rather than a worse one.
Many who would call a business unethical for moving somewhere with a more favorable regulatory environment are entirely in favor of economic migrants moving to welfare states to be better off. They might argue the business should pay back the benefits it got from the welfare state, but would probably bristle at the suggestion that the migrants were unethical for wanting to benefit without paying into it.
In the end it's the same thing really, human nature. Nothing about a business generates any kind of ethics or generosity beyond what people have.
Also regarding getting a job to take a mortgage for life aspirations, the nordic countries have actually much more social mobility than most other countries in the world.
Doesn't that describe most if not all economies that have middle class?
Private mortgage was considered a great way to increase national wealth in "rich" post-WW2 economies. And so it became part of "the expected economic life path of the middle-class employee".
Most people who are employed work to satisfy basic economic needs: 1. house 2. food 3. health and after that 4. leisure. Some even turn to 5. investment at some point.
So I'm not sure what you are trying to say? Maybe expand/rephraze it a little bit?