America isn't a Capitalist nation and hasn't been for decades.
America is between a mixed economy and Socialism, with the world's largest welfare system, and 'social safety net.' 3/4 of the massive Federal budget goes to social welfare programs. From 1930 to perhaps the early 1980s, the US was a mixed economy.
Every aspect of the US economy is completely under regulation and Federal control. The number of Federal regulations has doubled since 1975. There are now over 170,000 pages of Federal regulations in total, governing every aspect of ... well, everything. Obama's Administration alone added over 11,000 new regulations in just his first two years in office. America is the ultimate regulation state (aka the opposite of a low regulation free market).
America is heavily taxed, and has a total government system that eats 40% of the economy, and at $6.4 trillion is larger than the economy of Japan. Those facts alone disqualify the US as being Capitalistic.
It's quite easy to demonstrate that America is in fact not Capitalistic any longer. A very short historical comparison of the economic structures (spending, taxes, welfare, regulations, etc) of the US economy in, say, 1820, 1890, 1910, 1930, 1975, 2013 - more than demonstrates the progression from highly unregulated Capitalism toward Socialism.
Capitalism requires an unregulated free market based economy. America is almost as far away from that as you can get before becoming a full blown Socialist nation. Even worse, America's variation of Socialism is going to be Fascism, and is rapidly trending that direction.
> Capitalism requires an unregulated free market based economy.
No, it doesn't; at best, laissez faire capitalism requires an unregulated free market, but even then allowances are made towards regulation to protect property rights. Capitalism isn't solely determined by a lack of regulation.
I started going through each point you've made, but it's not worth it. You're simply too wrong to bother.
Start by looking up the difference in meaning between 'capitalism' and 'mixed economy.' The former is a description of an idealized economy that hasn't ever truly existed, while the latter is a description of how an economy is actually organized. In fact, a mixed economy is considered a form of capitalism (it's not one or the other). "The common features among all the different forms of capitalism is that they are based on the production of goods and services for profit, predominately market-based allocation of resources, and they are structured upon the accumulation of capital."
My comment was trying to address where my impression of how your definition of capitalism and what I consider to be the commonly considered definition of capitalism differs.
If you want to try to restate/reword you definition we can discuss how it differs from my readings and sources or how my initial impression was incorrect if that happens to be the case. Then the consequences can be discussed if there is interest.
This is even funnier, considering that post-2008 bailouts, the Big 3 Car companies (GM, Ford, Chrysler) all moved their factories/jobs to St. Petersburg, Russia. I'd say "ironic", but it seems to have been planned.
Either way, we're now the USSR, and all the capitalism is on the other side of the ocean.
