"Market Oriented" is part of capitalism but I don't think that qualifies this as capitalist, at least not under a definition that works within the capitalist-socialist paradigm.
European socialist politicians could get behind this as readily as capitalist ones. This is really a 'welfare state' solution. Welfare state being the capitalist-socialist compromise that most wealthy countries currently have. IE: (a) Grant citizens rights. (b) Do redistribution while trying to keep the free market as intact as possible. (c) Provide some services directly. (education, health) (d) Support the poorest segments directly.
I agree that a negative tax system would be cleaner (especially on paper) and probably have fewer side effects. But, it's not outside the paradigm of or current system. If you seriously proposed you wouldn't find that socialists object and capitalists support it. You'll find that capitalists and socialists will object or support it based on how progressive it is. IE how much redistribution it does. If it increases redistribution, the right in most countries would object.
Actually, any such radical change would piss off a huge matrix of embedded interests so all politicians would either object or try to manipulate it to suit their (friends') agendas... but that's a function of politics rather than ideology.
