If I may jump in here, I would mention that the problem of overproduction
is not, as far as I can tell, a moral problem with capitalism, but rather
an inherent consequence of the process of supply and demand. As Keynes (I
think) explained it, the problem is that there is always a lag between
supply and demand; when consumer demand goes up, supply doesn't
immediately adjust, it's simply impossible to do so. Also, business has
to make production decisions based on reasonable projections of future
demand. Finally, as output increases, costs generally go up.

Mix all that together and you have a dynamic something like this:
consumer demand goes up, which sets business in motion to meet increased
demand. Because of inherent lag in meeting demand business bases output
on projected demand as well as current demand. In raising output, costs
(including labor) go up, raising prices. This inhibits demand. Falloff in
demand triggers downturn in production, which again because of lag, is
too late to stop production already in motion and accumulated
inventories. Result: oversupply, which leads to higher unemployment,
leading to further drops in demand, leading ultimately to drops in price.
At a certain point accumulated inventory is cleared and the entire cycle
can start over again.

If Keynes is right we are dealing with problems of information flow and
inherent uncertainty that can be minimized but never completely
eliminated. That, to me, suggests that society meliorate the impact on
labor with a secure safety net, but not that any other economic system
would be any better at solving this particular problem.

_________
Tresy Kilbourne, Seattle WA
"A childish soul not inoculated with compulsory prayer is a soul open to
any religious infection."  -- Alexander Cockburn