That would be a valid analogy if it wasn't self-reenforcing to the point where it destroys whatever mechanism of regulation you have, and if any limitations on

That would be a valid analogy if it wasn't self-reenforcing to the point where it destroys whatever mechanism of regulation you have, and if any limitations on it weren't attacked by comparing them to failed state capitalist or fascist states and attributing everything good that happend under or in spite of it to capitalism. The broken part is assigning power to power. This has an identical outcome whether you call the nexus of power money or favour of the people's party. Sufficiently regulated capitalism is less like a modern neoliberal system than the USSR or a totalitarian regime. There's no evidence it has done any good that doesn't follow from any other type of industrialisation or access to the fruits of science (it may), but there are a great number of problems it does cause and a number of problems it is fundamentally unsuited for. So more like ethanol -- might do some good, but definitely does a lot of harm if you have too much.