D the G. You highlight the opposing polarities and the need to seek a middle ground. We all want to retain the "Socialist" aspects of Heath, Education, Pensions, etc. in order to nurture a cradle to grave "caring society". The problem arises when trying to fund it. It has to be from the profits of capitalism. As you point out, unfettered capitalism takes no prisoners and left to itself can generate obscene profits for a favoured few. These few can fund vast armies of taxation specialists to make a mockery of tax legislation in many countries, As a result they retain most of their profits. Politicians seem unable or incapable of challenging this state of affairs. Short of a revolution, politicians are the only group able to legislate to change this situation. First the conversation must be initiated by the electorate. Some believe in the ethical purchase of goods, I would prefer to see the concept applied (with great publicity and intensity) to the selection of all politicians.
We need to be far more discriminating in choosing our representatives, and have vastly increased powers to fire them when they disregard their electorate. There is little point in having representatives that do not represent you! The party whips and lobbyists would appear to have far more control over those elected than those that elected them. In a rational world, this is a most bizarre state of affairs and must be rectified.