I too believe in the Social Democratic model. Pure Capitalism leads to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. We should look to the Scandinavian models on how to combine capitalism with progressive social policies. The citizens of Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland rank top of the indices of “happiness surveys” every year....Norway and Denmark swapping between numbers one and two every year! They are also amongst the richest countries per capita, and have the lowesr differential between rich and poor.

I support compassionate, classical liberal capitalism.

There is no pure capitalism or communism. You might as well say black music or white music. The two are so intermingled that any examination is tainted. About the only true capitalist structure is illegal drugs. Price and quality control are determined by market forces alone. If you count police raids as natural disasters.
So what we argue is degrees and where each system is most appropriate. No one sits down and figures out how much bread Milwaukee will need tomorrow. Shops buy a little over what they usually sell and bakers fill the orders. Similarly no successful society relies on private education or an unsubsidized transport system.
Capitalism has it place but it has many flaws. It has no morals and it is cyclical. A fact that is so often overlooked by political parties on both sides over the years. The 2008 crash could not be avoided. Nor should have been but it should have been predicted and contingency plans implemented. The fact that it was not is a testimony to how near sighted democracy makes our govts.

No, I have lived in a Communist country, a Social democratic one and a Conservative one. The best one for everybody is the Social democratic one.

Not since I found out how the banks create money out of of debt. It’s just not right or proper.

It seems pretty clear that to inspire people to work hard they have to be free to profit from their own talents, creativity, and energy. Lack of such freedom led to the downfall of the Soviet Union. It is also clear that in unregulated capitalism big fish eat up little fish and multiple rounds of consolidation eliminates competition and creates monopolies. Without competition the quality of goods and services declines. And without regulation corporations run rough shod over the environment, realizing profits for investors but leaving the public holding the liabilities. That's what is happening right now as Trump denies climate science in order to allow the fossil fuel industry to rake in massive profits. Meanwhile, fires, floods, and asthma devastate average Americans.

That's without regulation. With regulation, the system can reach high efficiency and productivity, improving life for billions. The highly regulated model is not pure capitalism however. It is a mixture of capitalism and socialism.

In his zeal to do away with financial and environmental regulations, Trump tilts the scale towards pure capitalism. His policies produce short-term gains that really only benefit an elite minority. In the long run they erode the foundations of our economy.

To answer the original question, I have to say no, I don't still believe in pure capitalism. I don't think I ever did. But I think a dash of capitalism is necessary to keep people interested in producing and innovating.

Not as it is practiced today. Todays version resembles the capitalism of the early 1900's, what was then called "Social Darwnism" ( a misnomer and the term as it applied was misapplied and ignored many of the basic tenents of the theory is wss named after). It was the end of the reign of the robber barons and ultimately led to the Great Depression.

Survival of the most greedy pretty much describes capitalism as its being practiced today. Its a form of "predatory capitalism" which focuses upon the very short term success. Get it all now get as much as you can, and it doesn't matter what you do to the market, the society, or the nation. Then run to offshore accounts with your booty.

Conversely. If they were following a true capitalustic evolutionary model, the outlook would focus on long term health, fitness and success. Decisions would be made along the lines of, "What can I do to obtain adequate success and wealth, and at the same time make sure my actions perpetuate the system ad infinitum?" If we choose to compare capitalistic practices to evolutionary principles, then lets use all the priciples associated with the theory. If we did, we would have a healthier, more robust economic system that would meets everybody's need and perservere long into the future.

No system works if it's run by corrupt, greedy idiots. Fix that and capitalism will work just fine.

Capitalism took the world out of poverty and improved lives and lifespan wherever it was embraced.

[slides.ourworldindata.org]

[slides.ourworldindata.org]

I believe it exists and that's it. It's a flawed system made even moreso by human greed.

Yes but only a form that is regulated properly. There are certain things that a profit motive should have nothing to do with ever.

You need a 3rd choice for those of us who never thought it was a good idea.

I never believed in capitalism.
Most "-isms" don't work for long, if at all.

Never did since I became aware of the world around me. My father was a social;ist and taught me well.

I believe in capitalism. It can work. Unfortunately, I also believe in greed. I see examples of it constantly, and so I can't ignore that it exists. I see how it corrupts capitalism. No societal model can operate efficiently once greed dominates it.

Not as it is currently practiced in the U.S. anyways. I mean more towards how they prctice it in the Democratic Socialist countries in Northern Europe.

I'm not sure since I became aware of other systems that I ever believed in capitalism. What bothers me most as an American is the real stupidity and mind zombism of an unknowingly and brainwashed people. People who think anything else other than capitalism is evil and unbiblical (ironic as the bibly has been used to support other systems like feudalism, which seems a lot like a system similar to capitalism). Far too many in the U.S. don't know the difference between socialism and communism, thus the capitalist have won any argument in favor of more socialism.

Pure capitalism means child labor. It means a wealthy class who rules over the poor. It eventually means the big conglomerates taking over the government and the military. It may eventually come to the enslavement of the poor. Eventually revolution will come.

It will end in many deaths.

Capitalism needs to be reigned in and monitored, before it becomes corporate slavery.

In its pure form but not when it is mixed with politics.

Yes but it needs to be regulated. None of the Libertarian Laissez Faire type of Republican Wet Dreams.

I personally support the idea of mutualism [en.m.wikipedia.org] , particularly as it pertains to the United States of America .

Fascism is capitalism in decay.

Capitalism is definitely better than communism where everything is state run, but there needs to be incentive for corporations to treat employees well and for corporations to be good community members. The article at the following link is a bit long, but it provides a good analysis of where the root of problem is: corporations now place maximizing shareholder value above all else, so wages have stagnated while share prices have gone up. This started in the Reagan era when "Trickle-down Economics" was the Republican fad and corporate taxes were lowered, with the result that the rich got richer with no real benefit to the working class.
[forbes.com]

No system is perfect, but capitalism is way better than socialism.