The definition is not what capitalism is "supposed to be"; it's what it IS, whether you like or agree with it or not -- just an economic system where stuff is owned by people or organizations instead of by the state.

That's why definitions exist -- to enable rational conversations about things ... assuming that everyone can remain rational. Ahem.

And it's not MY "label"; it's Webster's definition -- a reasonably objective standard reference.

I get that you're disappointed with how unrestricted capitalism is turning out in the U.S. Me too, but please try to stay rational, and don't lash out at people, especially over things that you IMAGINE they're saying.

I'm paying attention too and have been for decades, and I agree that the system needs serious reform, but the problem isn't me or "resorting to labeling things".

But with "bank robbers receiving just as much societal influence and power as those who help society", Elvis has left the building. WTF?

I'm not in any way "fear mongering about alternative systems". I'm saying that if one intends to "rebel against capitalism" <eye roll> in some still-to-be-meaningfully-defined way, that socialism and communism are your other two basic choices -- no fear, no mongering, just rationality. If you don't like the first, do you really believe that either of the other two are a better choice?

And what do you mean by "your type"? You don't know me, and you're already so triggered by what you THINK I said that the rage train has left the station.

Where did I say that "capital should be more important than ethics and social interactions and contributions"? All I literally did was to quote the definition of a word, and you're off to the races.

Best of luck. You're gonna need it.