The fundamental problem with capitalism (as described by Bo Burnham

If it were a community of people possessing mental frailty and illness, I would simply remark upon it with no criticism,

Ok what about a community socially/economically disadvantaged people?

I think individuals and groups should have a sense of responsibility for how they confront existence, no matter what it is.

Yes but not for how existence confronts them.

If Diagnosis could be a philosopher, If the Rome could grow to a nation from a single city, If Japan could equal the West and decimate the Russians in the Russo-Japanese War.

I'd hold out hope for a socially and economically disadvantaged people.

I like the idea of my fate being in my own hands

Though I did not care for his interpretation, finding his words unduly harsh, and lacking an understanding that some people do not possess the capability to respond to certain circumstance or that certain circumstance can overwhelm.

I can relate to that feeling right now. 

What's happening in life with you?

Non sequitur. None of these examples gives us a long term solution to systemic poverty. 

I like the idea of my fate being in my own hands

I like that idea too. The problem is that I don't think we have any evidence that this is the case.

Though I did not care for his interpretation, finding his words unduly harsh, and lacking an understanding that some people do not possess the capability to respond to certain circumstance or that certain circumstance can overwhelm.

I can relate to that feeling right now. 

What's happening in life with you?

This conversation. 

I like the idea of my fate being in my own hands

I like that idea too. The problem is that I don't think we have any evidence that this is the case.

The practical nature of it exists, I would argue.

The appearance of it exists, I would argue.

Non sequitur. None of these examples gives us a long term solution to systemic poverty. 

I forget what a Non sequitur is, one Google search later, ah.

They are appeals to emotion, though I don't see that as a bad thing.

Understanding apparent choice, can lead to such 'realities, as a person not lashing out physically in anger. But instead taking a moment to calm down, or go for a walk.

Thus not hurting others, their own self worth, or incurring prison time.

They are non sequitur in that they do nothing to logically support the idea that ALL individuals are responsible for their own economic and socio political realities. Could the average citizen of Japan effect the outcome of the war? Is it the fault of the average Russian citizen that they lost the war?

Is it not true that the cities and nations that rome conquered did not want or choose to be concuered?

Understanding apparent choice, can lead to such 'realities, as a person not lashing out physically in anger. But instead taking a moment to calm down, or go for a walk.

Thus not hurting others, their own self worth, or incurring prison time.

In what way does determining the course of action least likely to incur negative consequences equate to choice? Freewill is unnecessary when planning ones day. Only an awareness of more than one possible course of action and an understanding of the likely consequences of said course.

I speak of Rome, to describe how the small can become great.

It is an oversimplification but it illustrates one of capitalism's largest weaknesses in regards to promoting human welbeing.

Why not just sell something else as opposed to wish for rape?

Indeed why not sell something other than cigarettes rather than actively adding to the rate at which humans develop lung cancer and pulmonary disease. Why not sell something other than crude oil if burning it is contributing to a planetside disaster?

Your idealism is touching but not grounded in reality.

Re: oil, it's been found that implementing a lot of Green initiatives often have equal or similarly harmful negative effects on the environment (i.e. mining lithium for electric cars).

People get heart disease from sugar - are bakers evil for selling you delicious cakes?

Understanding apparent choice, can lead to such 'realities, as a person not lashing out physically in anger. But instead taking a moment to calm down, or go for a walk.

And so the foolish brute hammers away at friends and families, not even considering the idea of himself having control, or will over his own actions. . .

It might be "evil" for our tax dollars to be leveraged in order to subsidize the sugar industry.

Eh, that's a stretch and a stretch from the original question as well. I wonder: is the government evil for subsidizing Big Oil so poor people can have heat?

Are you conflating luxury with necessity?

I asked if bakers were evil for supplying delicious cake. Are you saying it's only evil if government helps the bakers? 

Oil is the cheapest way to provide heat but it's not the only way. Furthermore transportation is arguably a necessity, so if necessities justify oil subsidies you could make a case for why people need to move around. 

Well 3RU7AL decided to get pedantic about it. Good luck he is a much more skilled interlocutor and logician than I am.