I favor a regulated partially-free-enterprise system. Markets are the most efficient ways to distribute resources - but they are not the smartest. This isn't my idea - I saw it on the front page of the Wall Street Journal. Whenever regulations to protect the economy have been proposed, there has been fear and concern about the effect on jobs and existing industries. In every single case, new services and suppliers have sprung up to fill the new needs. Capitalsim is robust. But I question whether "redistribution" is the other end of the spectrum. It seems that in an unregulated market, the rich can confiscate from others. Confiscation is confiscation - can't make it OK.
Bradley, you might like Paul Hawken's works on business and economy. The Ecology of Commerce is a good one, and helps describe how the true costs of producing and disposing of items can be calculated.
I would be in favor of abolishing the progressive nature of the US taxation system with a flat tax IF loopholes for the rich and corporations were weeded out, and everyone paid their fair share. I fear that the accounting lobby would not let that happen, but they are not as powerful as they used to be... and payroll taxes vs. FICA and SocSec are a messy question as well.
It seems that capitalism works as well as it does because we can count on humans to be motivated by profit a good deal of the time. Socialsim has been proven to be a bad deal in the Sino-Soviet sense in that we cannot count on enough humans to be motivated by altruism most of the time (Oh great, here come the Ayn Rand quotes:)