Taming capitalism

If capitalism is considered synonimous to 'laisser faire', leaving things to the forces of nature, then you cannot expect events always to be favourable to all people. Just like any of nature's ways. You only can expect the law of the jungle.

In many other cases where nature goes wild, we use to tame it. E.g. the Hooverdam in the Colorado river, the Deltaplan to keep the Netherlands dry, etc. etc.
Why not tame capitalism, when it runs out of hand?

To me then the first thing coming to mind is the accumulation of capital in case of a successful business. 

Now, there is not much wrong with a successful business. Almost everybody profits from it: its entrepreneur of course, its financers, its employees and its customers, to name a few.
It has been shown to be a bad idea to cut off capitalism at this point.

But after the entrepreneur has finished, his earned capital starts to accumulate on its own.
From that point onwards it neither should benefit, nor be controlled by just a small selection of people. At that point it should benefit all of the community in stead.

How?
Well how about abolishing inheritance laws?
Honest entrepreneurs, like everyone else, can keep their earnings as long as they live. But after that it should become the community's.

Too bad for their children; they - like everyone else - can prove themselves.

(This being the first step. After that let's think of what next. Let's not repeat the tragedies of the twentieth century in name of ideologies.)