In his great inaugural speech, he talked about the economy - "Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age."

Which says Yes there are problems now - but doesn't question the overall legitimacy of the Capitalist way of doing things.

Indeed he later said - "Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favours only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good."

Its power to generate wealth is indeed unmatched - that's what the aim of Capitalism is - more money. And actually it has not proved in the past to have been the "surest route to the common good". That's the dis-credited high tide lifting all boats theory!

And expanding freedom is not what Capitalism does - particularly for those at the bottom of the pile. And even if you are at the top of the pile, it doesn't bring the happiness it promises - read Affluenza.

For me, the interesting question now is - is this nevertheless the first step towards seeing Capitalism for what it actually is? His speech has a clarity and a lack of dogma that augurs well for future reductions in the power of the purely economic view of everything.

Capitalism needs to be phased out as we collectively see more and more clearly how it works - this could be a definite move forward - it's now a question of action to meet the rhetoric.