Expanding on this, the crises of capitalism (people without food or homes, or being exploited for their work and given little to nothing in return) that continu

Expanding on this, the crises of capitalism (people without food or homes, or being exploited for their work and given little to nothing in return) that continually arise throughout history as well as today can be seen as a symptom of this very fundamental assumption of property and its place in a society. This is what defines capitalism along with the freedom to pay (or not) a voluntary amount for any good or service. This will always lead to the concentration of wealth and if left unchecked will progress to bring far more suffering on the many to the benefit of the few than many feel comfortable accepting from an ethical standpoint. One can always propose regulations but it's a steep uphill battle to close every last loophole that people have to extract wealth from a population, usually unethically. People against capitalism are usually for something else, and they propose to change the fundamental properties of the economic system at hand to one that puts ownership directly in the hands of labor (socialism), is inherently redistributional (communism), or never supposes the need for redistribution in the first place (elimination of private property such as in pure anarchism). Those against capitalism have seen the endless failed attempts to patch the system, but the bugs are built into what makes the kernel work. Political processes are too slow to respond to the crafty and conniving, and are anyhow weak to the siren's call of having a higher economic status and so sacrifice their morals way more often than they are comfortable. Cronyism is built into the distributional properties of capitalism because of this assumption of private property.