Thank you!

I don't reject inequality as such. People should be rewarded for hard work and time spent for the wellfare of the community. I don't believe that the profit motive tends to reward the right kinds of engagement, though. Make sure everyone has food and shelter, the elderly, the young and the sick are taken care off and public infrastructure is in prime condition. Then take care of supplying luxury goods - and, quite frankly, do we really need a whole industry which doesn't actually create any real value while at the same time creating insane rewards for its participants?

As I said, there can and should be some inequality in outcomes. But there also should be a limit to that inequality. Nobody needs a hundred million dollars to adequately pursue their personal happiness.

I agree wholeheartedly on your point about unions.

One more question, if I may:

Since in a capitalis society, capital equals power:

What is going to prevent the wealthy from using their economic advantage to influence the (limited) government you envision in their favor, much as we see today and have seen in the past (re: suppression of unions.) Are we going to rely on politicians to reject the profit motive which the society they operate in celebates?

In case you're interested, I shared some of my concerns about capitalism in another reply in this thread.