I think you saw from how i adressed those points that you dont really understand where im coming from.
Allow me to elaborate. Why are property rights? Property rights arise from selfownership (which you literally can not argue against without being selfcontradictory) and from those the right of a worker to his produce. If i pick up an unowned stick and fashion it into a walking cane, that resulting cane is mine to do with as i please. Including selling it. Proudhon actualy while "property is theft" is regularly quoted by socialists, is part of the history of my ideas. He was in that instance specificly talking about landproperty gained through violence instead of homesteading. Capitalists would agree with him and would view the vast majority of land as unowned. Of course, proudhon also stated that "Property is Liberty" on another occasion adressing actual legitimate property.
Now, yes, i believe you are fundamentaly wrong about a few things.
What you, as well as capitalists (and, yes, many socialists) actualy have a problem with is not capitalism. Aside from general state interference it is the economic model under which we operate. Keynesian economics. Literally designed to trap our children in debt so we can now spend, spend, spend. Trying to increase the GDP is what we are doing, why would any Person actualy care about that? The state does becouse its got debt to pay and pays them with on one hand tax revenue, on the other hand, promised tax revenue in the future, thats where the fixation on the GDP comes from.
As i see it, the GDP is a massive bubble and it is a bubble by design, needs to come way down. I rather have an apple tree in my garden then buy apples, you understand? But that wouldnt be good for the GDP now, would it? Heck, have you ever thought about why so many people rent an apartment rather than build a house? Well, theres two ways to explain that, i could go into the mechanisms such as the state rejecting the homesteading principle, zoning laws and so on, but why do they want us to rent a place rather than building or buying? Simple, if i build my own house, thats at most counting one transaction towards the GDP. If i take on a loan to buy a house to rent out thats now counted at least 4 times over, once for the actual building of the house, once for me buying the house, once for me taking the rent and once for me paying back my loan.
Now im not saying landlords are illegitimate, as an arangement it may make sense for some people (namely those that dont want to take care of everything about the house themselves) but it would be a lot less common if capitalism was allowed.
In any event, thats all keynesian economics.