A significant part of answering that question in a good way depends on how exactly the current policies and infrastructure are responsible for the unprecedented

A significant part of answering that question in a good way depends on how exactly the current policies and infrastructure are responsible for the unprecedented-in-human-history decline in suffering and extreme poverty and increase in population and average quality of life. To frame the question - in order for things to be as good as they are, is it required to have a system in which winners like Jeff Bezos are inevitable, or in fact necessary for the system to function? You can plan and abstract theories and rule changes and ethics and morals, but human systems are chaotic and strange. Fallibility and mistakes and whim make economics at scale a really hard thing to predict. Another question would be if you think things are relatively good, does switching to better policies run the risk of destabilizing and losing all the relative gains for extended periods before the better system breaks even?