I'm very suspicious of that factoid, given that limiting Paracetamol purchase size was very effective at reducing overdoses in the UK.

Also, the US has seen a recent huge rise in opioid overdoses ...

Some things should simply be left to Our Betters.

After the Alfie Evans circus I'm inclined to agree. You need to be properly trained to be able to recognize what is in the best interest of the patient and that that is the only thing that matters.

It’s bizarre that “capitalism” is frequently blamed for the moral atrocity that is the American medical industry when really it’s one of the most clear cut examples of a state-mandated cartel

I'd be a great business man to if people were legally required to purchase my product.

That is just absurd. We accept that kings will naturally strive to uphold their power, that feudal lords will protect their privileges, and so on. But somehow, some seemingly dogmatic people firmly believe that despite the entire incentive structure pointing in that direction, genuine agents of capitalism are not furthering their own interests through the means of state power.

Of course they are. But that is not capitalism. You can't blame the free market for people "furthering their own interests through the means of state power" when the very existence of state power is antithetical to free markets. The "free" in "free market" refers specifically to the absence of legitimized and systematic aggression, of which state power is the foremost example.

This is a completely and utterly ahistorical redefinition together with selective reasoning. The theological fantasy where capitalism is freed from its state component would not differ either with regards to these incentives, the state would just be replaced by "private-property lords" which you'd stamp as legitimate and welcome the voluntary toil of the propertyless masses.

If you're going to use private and/or archaic definitions for common terms, please say so up front so we can avoid wasting our time. The term capitalism in common use today means a political and economic system which favors private ownership of the means of production, with strong implications of "laisse-faire" and "free market" policies. It is not a synonym for plutocracy, the vesting of political power in those possessing wealth. To the extent that owners of capital are effective in turning the power of the state to their own benefit, to intervene in the market on their behalf, what you have is a plutocracy, not capitalism.

Unsurprisingly, you did not address the point I made. The surgical separation of private-property, political power, and plutocracy that you're making is a fantasy in which they're somehow not deeply intertwined and interdependent from start to finish.

Also do yourself a favour and never assume that your US libertarian bubble definition is the de facto standard around the globe. Europe has a long and dark history of the kind of (neo-)feudalism that you're peddling, it's not hard to spot.

Citizens United is one such example.