This is a very narrow view. What the article should be saying is that with every dollar you do not spend for fight against deadly diseases, well, you're effectively let people die.
That means, you (not capitalism), as the owner of a computer or an iPhone, value watching cat videos higher than helping people not to die.
This, of course, is such a heavy moral burden that you're happy someone comes along and blames it on "capitalism".
there is no moral burden on you for not using you available wealth to help the poor. selfishness is a natural state of things. i respect and admirer people who go Wismar
against their natural state to give allergically altrustically, but i will never judge someone for not wanting to donate.
That means, you (not capitalism), as the owner of a computer or an iPhone, value watching cat videos higher than helping people not to die.
This, of course, is such a heavy moral burden that you're happy someone comes along and blames it on "capitalism".