There is not much particularly true in this article but it is nice to see the viewpoint written out.
This view of capitalism is actually completely the opposite of what capitalism is actually about. Capitalism is all about the creation of wealth out of nothing. Growing the money supply. Under capitalism money is NOT conserved. Never is. It is created by cognitive effort.
A notable example in Business Schools is this one at the University of Texas at Austin: IC² Institute has advanced the Theory and Practice of Entrepreneurial Wealth Creation. (i.e., Intellectual Capital Squared). https://eureka.utexas.edu/research-units/ic2-institute
That said, in most all of your points you are correct, and would have been just as correct even 50 years ago (when I was probably your age). What is incorrect is that you think it has gotten worse.
True science and the arts were as suffering from the same plights in about the same amounts back then.
However, it is also true that with so many millions more people today than yesterday, our sciences are moving much quicker, as are our arts. I think the point of my Poem from 1993 has been proven true, despite the negatives that have been similarly amplified by sheer population and communication growth.
Back to capitalism. Like any domain that develops intellectual tools, the tools of capitalism have been horrifically misused as well as used for good.
The sins of "capitalism' are really the sins of using the tool for the purpose of evil (anti-democratic government). These are exceptionally bad and evil, but the evil lies not in capitalism per se.
A lot this problem has arisen as it arose in past ages with the amplification of fiat lies. This continues to be a dangerous problem and must always be mitigated or tamped down. The misappropriated uses of the cognitive tools mankind have developed through its unique communication capability in human natural language. We must continue to employ our natural language capability to expose the lies that do damage.
Our computational cognitive neuroscience today can explain why where before we did not have the science to understand why the human mind makes such things inevitable but controllable.
Your article contains a lot of "light lies" that are lies formed in a lack of experience, and not particularly damaging. I once asked our top IT guys in Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon if the bad hacking was worse in ~2010 than in ~1990, and they said, no. It was about the same level. They had to do about the same amount of work now (~2010), as then, to keep the bad hacking under control. Same two people. My perception, as a computer security guy, was not that at all. Later, I realized those two guys were right.
So, keep up the pressure to keep true science and the arts alive. Even if you lie a little bit about how it was better back when.
P.S., I think there are too many Philosophers around nowadays. But that is another story...