Market pressure forces innovation in the direction of profit, not satisfying needs. Enshittification is an example of innovation that negatively impacts the user experience. At lower stages of development, markets can be a part of an overall planned system and have great growth, but they need to be managed carefully by a socialist state, a la the PRC, or you end up with private monopoly and megacorps that control the state like the US.

It’s generally not true. What is true is that every single person in a society organized to kill you through neglect is motivated to find some way to making a lot of money and escaping their plight. The way you do this in a capitalist society is you make some rich people much richer. So you try to come up with ways to make them richer.

Sometimes that means solving problems that the masses will pay you for, if only you could scale it (investors show up to scale it, take 70% of the value, you become a millionaire).

Sometimes that means solving a problem for industry that reduces their costs, if I only you could overcome the upfront costs (investors show up to build it, take 70% of the value, you become a millionaire).

However, what people who have never done this don’t realize is that the real problem being solved is the problem of making rich people more money. Literally anything that makes them richer will get there investment, regardless of it solves social problems or creates social problems. Inversely, if you solve social problems for the masses but it can’t make the rich richer, then your solution never gets any traction.

The selection criteria is fundamentally whether or not it makes the rich richer. That’s why in the US such a massive percentage of GDP is artificial markets - copyrighted art and media, digital rights management, digital locks on tractors and machinery, digital locks on printer ink and Keurig cups - or total wastes of time - billions in rebranding, billions in consulting to merge and then divest - or in terribly damaging social engineering - billions in pink taxes, boys vs girls branding, manipulating beauty standards, manipulating children, sugary cereals, endless plastic toys, chemical engineering to create food cravings and suppress satiety, etc.

So yes, competition creates a frenzy of activity, but the activity is poorly directed, often negative value, innovative and novel ways to harm people, and ultimately not geared towards anything useful.

Meanwhile, look at socialism and compare where it actually matters - the Soviets dominated space exploration compared to the West. During COVID, the US spent billions racing for a vaccine and Cuba developed one on the same timeline without the massive grift while under the most brutal and long-term collective punishment regime in the history of the world.

At the end of the day, purposeful, intentional, directed effort will always beat the mass chaos of random actors all frenzily trying to save themselves out of desperation.