A lot of the examples of “bad features of capitalism” that American leftists cite are things that the still very much capitalist Nordic countries don’t have.
There’s nothing inherent in capitalist modern society that leads to student and medical debt, shitty jobs with minimal unions or labor law protections, ubiquitous McMansions and chain restaurants, obnoxious advertising, and so on. There are technocratic fixes to these problems.
It seems fair to say though that these are cases where capitalism is held in check by other forces – not I guess in any way that a hard-leftist would be satisfied with, since they tend to relate “capitalism” with “bourgeois interests” where the latter can be defined quite expansively, but definitely in terms of the raw mechanics of capitalism. The USA like the Vatican of capitalism, so it’s much stricter about the idea that it’s morally and pragmatically wrong to do something if classical economists don’t like it (and of course the US also has the racial conflict thing to defuse and deflect working-class coalitions, which plays a big part). To get good results out of capitalism in terms of quality-of-life for the average person, it seems as though you have to treat it as one of many tools in your toolbox rather than as an ideology that should be served for its own sake.
(Of course, there’s also a broader dispute about how much the world’s rich nations rely on the exploitation of its poor nations – like, you can argue that America is really unusually fucked for a country in its position but also that the Nordic countries are unusually well-off because they’re winners in the current world order and that it’s hard to know how well they’d be doing if that weren’t the case. I don’t have a strong opinion on that, but it seems at least plausible.)
The USA like the Vatican of capitalism
You absolutely the fuck do not get to call your garbage-tier third world kleptocracy the Vatican of Capitalism.