At the risk of sounding dismissive, there is so much wrong with this comment that I scarcely know where to start.
> products are only worth something when work has been done to them
No really. A product is only worth something if is someone is willing to buy it. The value of a product is exactly how much someone is will to pay for it. If you build something that literally no one wants, then it's worth literally nothing.
>capitalists aren't even necessary for material supply. They are sufficient. Workers are necessary and sufficient for product creation
Starting and running a business is so much more than supplying material. And to do it successfully requires certain knowledge and skills that most people simply don't possess. This is the main reason that executives can command such high salaries—a great deal of money is on the line, and their decisions can literally make or break a company.
>defending capitalism is just defending an ideology not a truth of how things are done in the best sense
This the fundamental flaw of Marxist thought: It has a naive view of what is possible in the economic realm. (Thomas Sowell called this the "unconstrained vision.") Just because you can imagine structuring an economy a certain way doesn't mean that this way can actually work. We've already tried different ways to allocate resources (which is fundamentally what an economy does) and all but the market-based systems have proven utter failures.
>how they alone made it successful is a rather dubious claim
I never said or implied any such thing. Obviously, a successful business requires competent workers at every level. But, again, we are talking here about the people who had a vision and took a risk to start a business, and that counts for something. Never downplay the significance of bringing a brilliant IDEA to fruition. Yes, the people who do this become wealthy. And in the process, they provide a livelihood to their employees and highly desirable goods and services that improve the lives of the people who buy them.
>A coach doesn't win games, a team owner doesn't win games, a general manager doesn't win games, the players win games.
Actually, they ALL are responsible. We've seen countless examples of sports teams with incredibly talented players that nonetheless failed because of bad coaching or bad management. And don't forget that the owner is the one who puts out the money to attract good players in the first place.
>job creation again isnt only realized the best way through capitalism
Really? Because the last 150 years of human history would beg to differ.
>There are other ways of producing jobs in an economy that involve much less risk.
Let's hear all about 'em.