you have a right to develop them if you want and they are different enough from the existing ones

Labels like capitalism and communism are more window dressing than actual function

Nah fam. There's no point in labeling sets of ideas if they're rendered useless the moment they diverge from your imagined "pure" form. Being more complicated in practice than just a simple textbook definition doesn't mean they aren't "that" defined thing, it means textbook definitions are always fundamentally weak and flawed. Oversimplifications, models used to describe, not blueprints used to build.

Capitalism is roughly everywhere, underpinning everything globally because of its roaring success. Communism is roughly nowhere, for the same reasons of capitalism's overwhelming power.

The distinctions exist and matter.

the people who built the system to intentionally be shitty: The administrators, owners, and politicians.

Through the insurance companies, they are integral to the whole scam.

Finland and Russia are neighbors, both democratic capitalist societies.

"Democratic", now there is a very slippery word in any country lol. Regardless, Russia is not communist, I don't know what you think you're pointing out. Let's go ahead and drop it yeah?

You can't do human trials for an experimental drug if there's an already-approved drug that would potentially work (which is sensible - you don't want the patient to die if the experimental drug turns out to be worse than what was already available). This is actually one of the main things slowing cancer research, as the only people participating in trials have already gone through multiple rounds of treatment without success, and are so full of metastatised tumours and are so unwell that they're likely to drop dead any day even if given a miracle treatment. It's hard to get a new treatment approved if everyone who had it died afterwards, even if using it as a first-line treatment would probably save millions of lives.

Uh hyuk hyuk hyuk

If only we had independent scientists doing peer reviewed studies.

Oh wait...

Of course Steam participates in the (so called) "free market."

The company itself (that would be Valve) isn't publicly traded, but that doesn't mean anything about the market(s) they participate in.

How is this not capitalism? I'd love to hear the rationale there...

We don't have free unfettered capitalism, there are price controls, labor regulations

And people literally had to die to get them. You do understand that, right? Those regulations, however meagre they may be, are written in blood.

They are profit driven

Survival Of The Fittest: It's what America is.

First tell me, concretely, what is capitalism? Who practices capitalism without distorting the hell out of it all the time? Any capitalists out there without monopoly controls? So, when you decide to and not to prevent monopolies, you're deciding who gets to "act like a capitalist" (aka greedy pig fucker) and who doesn't. It's policy that's deciding to let this happen.

So, we don't actually have "capitalism" now, except where we decide to let it run rampant.

This particular example is a protected monopoly. When you let a protected monopoly loose combined with greedy actors, this is what happens. Doesn't matter what umbrella you put over it, the fact is: they've got what other people need and there's no competitor out there who isn't colluding to keep the prices sky high.

Call it profit, call it greed, call it extortion - all works out the same when the bill comes due.

last I checked there were next to no regulations on putting unregulated chemicals in your body and calling it an expirment.

Unfortunately, most people don't know what that is. And social media won't really tell them that because they benefit from having an ignorant population.

Read a book dude, it's not my job to define basic shit for you

I appreciate the Stirner cameo