The problem is nobody knows what short term is. it could be 10 years, 20 years, 30 years or more. If capitalists are given free reign, who cares for the worker who became unemployed because the factory in which he worked became unprofitable? Sure, the closing of factory led to free capital which was invested in say, a technology firm. But the unemployed worker doesn't know what's a computer and since he is uneducated and 50 years old, it's probably not possible for him to "up-skill" in computer technology. By the time capitalism completes a short-term cycle(of 20-30 years) he will probably die of starvation.
Interestingly, as a nation, we continue to imagine a black-and-white difference capitalism and welfare. Because BJP continued "capitalisation" of the economy when it was at the center during 1998-2004, it's viewed as pro capitalist. Because Congress ruled the country for most of the time before 1991 and then formed a coalition government with left in 2004 and took other pro-social steps during 2004-2013, it's viewed as pro-socialist. But India cannot afford to be either a capitalist or a socialist nation. We must promote capitalism as well as we can, then tax the capitalists and use the money from taxes for social welfare.
So, India must provide facilitate and support capitalist entrepreneurs and then use the money from taxes to educate, nourish and care for less fortunate citizens trying to make them a part of the capitalist system. Neglecting either capitalism or welfare would hurt the political party which does that(BJP was overthrown after 2004 and there is huge ant-incumbency sentiment in the country against present Congress government) but the bigger damage is done to the social fabric of the country.
Due to whatever historic policies and situations, there are two Indias: one would be better served by capitalism and the other by socialism. Whichever political party wins the coming general elections, it must balance the needs of two Indias unlike what has happened in the past.