After all, capitalism as a term is only useful insofar as it serves as a sort of signpost for the current power structure we find ourselves with. The reality of our current socioeconomic system is that it is so far removed from the concept of capitalism that it is barely recognizable if juxtaposed with Adam Smith's writings.
That's what happens with a foundational ideological framework. It is created within a huge (and rare) expenditure of energy, so that as time passes and mankind itself continues to evolve and even the ideology itself is left to be worked out on a practical level in the field, adjustments and fine tunings have to be made to fit the concept itself to the changing environment. These adjustments are of course made by whatever body of decision makers are in power, so that as a system matures, inferior men climb their way to the top of the ladders and alter the system to enrich themselves, thereby deforming it - how does this happen? Another problem to be tackled another day I suppose. As time goes on, the ideological framework becomes increasingly irrelevant and ill suited for the environment it is applied to, and the adjustments made to it to adapt to the environment (or at least adapt to enrich those at the top) become increasingly convoluted and entangled. This is when an entirely fresh framework must be put in place.
This is the case for spiritual ideas, philosophical ideas, economic, political, whatever.
So to remain on point, the problem with capitalism is simply that it has proven itself unstable, as it encourages power accumulation and resource waste. And it won't be replaced until it destroys itself unfortunately, as those charged with making the change have reached a critical threshold in which their power is nearly absolute.
Capitalism as an economic ideology is simply a product of a greater process: the ever-changing constitution of human consciousness. The Problem can more accurately be defined as a product of a destructive tendency towards hyperindividualism, and the resulting fractures that occur in a societal body as a logical result.
To illustrate, we live in a society where half of our population not only does not believe in helping others that are less fortunate (if they are not of course close friends or relatives), but are aggressively hostile towards the idea itself, as expressed in the widespread irrational hate of socialist ideas. How anyone can fail to understand that this attitude is directly antithetical to a coherent and stable society is beyond me.
Of course, it is inevitable that the system crash. And the crash will give birth to an equal and opposite movement of creative energy. It is a simple physical reality. Great ideas seem to be born out of crises. Those times when it becomes necessary for radical change. It's just going to hurt a little, that's all.
