As I previously wrote:
EDIT: Here's a suggestion for one specific thing that we can do to work towards this goal: Set a cooperative that sells rent credits (e.g. dollars per month) to people within an impoverished community. Take the money, place it in a growth-oriented fund, and wait until you have enough to buy an apartment complex. Buy the property, releasing rent credits so they can be sold or used. Continue to sell rent credits to raise funds to buy housing until every single person in the community is living in a cooperatively owned building. As long as the property remains cooperatively owned, every single person who rents there will be a homeowner and the entire community will be wealthier with much less poverty (if you own your home outright than you are probably close to or wealthier than the median). Tell me any reason at all why this would not work.
That is one example of how people can act their our own interest without the profit motive to make everyone in a given area a home owner, even within a capitalist economy, and greatly reduce poverty. That they lack infrastructure and education is because our property laws don't incentivize spending on them, and that the wealthy even infest the political system to prevent others from getting any real help. That without the poverty, our education would be much much better, and that alone will lead to higher innovation.
I'm suggesting that if we abandon the idea that the profit motive provides any benefit, and all work to cooperatively own what we, personally, depend on - crowdsource open license products and set up cooperative housing and businesses - and just do what's best for ourselves without trying to profit off of others, and in fact let the invisible hand do its job, it will lead to the best products for everyone. I'm suggesting that at every single step along the way, there is a way to move towards this goal that benefits the people spending the money directly.
I'm suggesting that we can set up our economy to be competing contractors to maximize competition and encourage productivity and innovation, and openly license copyrights and patents to lower the cost of follow-up inventions and allow us to make any incremental improvement we want. I'm suggesting that the marginal propensity to spend means inequality reduces the incentive to innovate, as the demand for new products is limited, and thus more equality, better education, and lower costs of invention will lead to much more innovation than we have today.