She says that capitalism creates issues within society that anti-capitalism then has to fix. However, free-market principles make life better in many facets. From the perspective of an activist, social causes are often conflicting with free-market economics, but it seems short-sighted to say that capitalism is the cause of many of our "wicked problems". In fact, it prevents many more societal issues.

This is a really interesting point. In society we celebrate big victories, things like same-sex marriage make headlines. However, acknowledging these victories can stifle progress towards greater efforts (such as ending homophobia). In general, this is a good mindset for life. Never stop at the finish line, run through it.

Corporate lobbying plays an undeniable role in limiting government policies aimed against climate change. However, he makes it seem as if corporations and politicians are in cahoots to hurt and profit from the general population. The truth is that politicians support corporations because those corporations employ and ultimately benefit citizens. Albritton simply wants to attack capitalism without recognizing its upsides.

This makes a very valid point. Democracy and capitalism can clash when wealth inequality prohibits "the masses" from speaking out. However, I think that in today's media everyone has a voice. Major media channels are owned by the wealthy, but it seems like a conspiracy to suggest that the "wealthy elite" control and manipulate all public discourse

Taxing billionaires cannot reverse the deep-seated racial tensions that plague the U.S. today. Black inequality is more than a matter of wealth disparity, it is a process of lawmaking and hegemonic relationships that dictate this divide. As intermarriage and ethnic assimilation increases, I believe that the wealth disparity will become less and less associated with the split between white and black people in the US.

There are loopholes in the tax system, offshore accounts and property ownership in "tax havens" are definitely a tool only the super rich can utilize. However, Warren demonizes billionaires, claiming their wealth is a result of the rigged game. She should propose tax reform without attacking the businessmen and women that have created endless opportunities for wealth in this company. Bill Gates is a billionaire, but the people he employs are not.

This is an interesting question being asked. For me, I really do struggle imagining a different sort of society. I close my mind off to anything other than free-market principles. That being said, ideological attempts to provide equality have always ended poorly in history. The only way I believe socialism and communist ideals could take hold is if global society veers away from the importance of materialism. It would take a complete shift in the way modern societies operate.

Without the potential for extreme wealth, what incentivizes business owners and innovators to push the boundaries? Obviously there is more to success than money, but I would say people like Bill Gates deserve to be a billionaire. Extreme poverty, however, is unacceptable.