Capitalism destroys our world, communism is better

Okay, it was good to get the clarification of your vision of communism, as a wholly communal effort without any national overseer. Yes, capitalism is bound to emphasise human greed and selfishness, but this is when the role of government becomes apparent; the legislature ought to protect against corruption and exploitation, which is often not done successfully. But the consumers are not rewarding greed, they are simply controlling market forces and what the people consider valuable, it is the private corporations which commit the greed, and it can't be expected of all people to have a vested interest in corporations activities, law, and politics. I would argue that capitalism does not do away with equality and solidarity; these are core values of the modern enlightened world which was created by innovation and creativity; provided by capitalism. Communism provides no will to work or innovate, the modern world is fuelled by innovation; through technology, philosophy, science etc. Why should we revert and reverse this progress by simply giving people what they need for themselves, and not rewarding innovators who stimulate the will of the people? The smartest person in the world with the potential to create world changing technology would receive the same resources as their neighbour, and never have the opportunity to create their own success and fulfill their dreams, and create and innovate to the benefit of society. There is more to capitalism than greedy corporations and exploitation - it creates everything we love and enjoy, and allows great minds to accomplish great things for the good of human-kind. Yes, the economy is in the hands of the private sector, this is the basis of capitalism. But it is not true that there is no competition and companies are simply bought out, of course there is competition. If the free-market dictates that out of two competing entities creating similar products, one of these entities provides a better product, or is cheaper, and the people choose to value this product more, it is likely that the losing corporation will fail; with their best financial option to be bought out - this is the very basis of competition. It is the same for democratic governments; the people choose their representatives, and if the people decide that they prefer another representative, they vote them out, and the new representative is put in their place. Excessive government influence is bad since if the government is in control of said defence mechanisms due to their power over the people, then it becomes irrelevant. The state ought to protect life and liberty, without interfering in private life. The state does not order people around in a capitalist system, the very basis of capitalism is to take the economy out of the states hands, and in to the private realm where the people are in control. Capitalism does create success, as I explained above. Where would Steve Jobs be if he were living in a communist state? It is simply impossible to cater for innovation and creativity in a society in which you are supplied with what you need on the basis of your ability rather than being supplied with the resources which the people dictate you deserve. There are bad apples in the mix, sure, but it is important to remember that it is the will of the people and their spending that creates successful people and businesses. Slightly off topic, but Donald Trump pays more tax than most people would ever dream of paying, and avoids it where the law allows it, the same as every smart business, why expend money you don't need to? This is where the state ought to step in to ensure corporations pay their fair share. Communism ultimately places the collective above individual freedom, whereas capitalism favours individual freedom. The individual is in control of production and pricing, and can cater this to suit market forces, as opposed to communism, in which the society determines the means of production and distribution of resources. Communism takes away individual liberty. Capitalism places responsibility on the individual - the individual is in control of their works, and if they wish to create success for themselves they must work for it, thus creating competition. Ultimately, private ownership and a living breathing economy controlled by the people ought to be favoured over a static communal system which provides no incentive for innovation or progression.