If (random made-up numbers here) 90% of bitcoin transactions are BTC being shuffled between exchanges and 'washed' through mixers, but 90% of wire transactions are people paying for rent, food, and hospital expenses, would you really say that the distinction isn't meaningful? The societal implications of those two groups of transactions are very, very different. I would argue that the latter group's importance is much higher than the former's.

And yet, much less of 90% of current fiat money transactions are "people paying for rent, food, and hospital expenses". Bitcoin doesn't really solve capitalism.

Not really. What is the point of cheaper price per transaction if, for some reason, nobody it's using it?