There are many definitions of economic systems. There is subsistence economy, communal economy, capitalist economy, etc.
For those interested in altruism, it should be noted that altruism itself, as a productive human activity, can be considered a potential large-scale economic system.

Obviously, in capitalism, altruism has little value, even if one considers one's fellow man as a potential producer-consumer of goods in an ever-expanding market. But in socialism, which claims that all economic activity serves the common good, we find ourselves in the field of dilemmas typical of game theory. If we all contribute to the common good out of our own self-interest... we will all try to obtain the greatest good from the system, contributing as little as possible. Therefore, socialism does not really serve the common good. Not, at least, with human beings.

The only economic system that would seem to really tend towards the common good would be one based on human altruism. In this sense, the theory of reciprocal altruism in ethology is of special interest, because animals, unlike human beings, do not act on the basis of reflexive behavior, but rather instinctive behavior. If the system of reciprocal altruism works sometimes in animals, it is not because they consider the convenience of this, but because their instinctive behavior patterns are the result of evolution.

For this reason, evolutionary psychologists do not consider human altruistic behavior based on reciprocity, but rather as an internalized behavior most likely based on culture, not on the basis of biological evolution, as in the case of animals. The typical example is that of the customer who gives a good tip in a restaurant to which he knows he will never return (which excludes reciprocity).

The apparent conclusion of all this is that if we really want an economy for the common good, we need to explore the field of human motivations for real altruistic behavior and the field of emotional - not material - gratifications for real altruistic behavior in our society, and this can only happen based on cultural changes

Today there are many individuals who act altruistically but they do so for different motivations. Obviously, no one acts against their own interests (not even altruistic people) but not all of us are interested in the same gratifications for our behavior. Many act altruistically for prestige reasons and others for religious beliefs. Both motivations are unstable and unpromising.

The most logical thing is to be interested in those people who act altruistically "to feel good about themselves" ... as is the case of the generous customer in the restaurant who will never return (of course, this altruistic act is just a relevant anecdote, but it does not express a systematic pattern of internalized altruistic behavior).

The famous study by Samuel and Pearl Oliner on "altruistic personality" seems to conclude that this type of behavior originates in the family environment, which has a much more acute impact on the formation of effective moral behavior than conventional institutionalized education.

Not all of us can be born into family environments that contribute to forming us emotionally as altruists. And, furthermore, the Oliner study focuses on a situation of extreme social emergency (the Shoah).

If we are motivated to act for a better world, and we know that the best way to do so is to expand an altruistic economic system, the logical conclusion is that the key element in this social change has to be exploring the possibilities of promoting genuine altruistic behavior as a cultural pattern. Altruistic behavior should work  on a large scale based on what we already know that can be intentionally modified in the cultural environment.  Our emotional reactions of moral nature and our rational capacity to accurately and unprejudicedly evaluate the social environment are all shaped by cultural patterns of behavior. And we can act  and participate consciously in cultural evolution by many means.

What has never been carried out is an unprejudiced discussion of cultural change strategies in the sense of moral improvement. We do have educational resources for children and youth, plus the already known mechanisms for the diffusion of moral values ​​within conventional culture. But the unspectacular results of all this have been visible for many years now.

Other types of mechanisms for changing behavior that are already known and very effective, and which have only been used so far by religious movements or violent organizations, have never been practiced for moral improvement - altruistic behavior capable of generating an effective altruistic economic system.

Let us recall the already known effect of religious conversions of "hardened criminals" within prisons, which leads to changes from antisocial to prosocial behavior, and of course, in the opposite direction (from prosocial to antisocial) and unfortunately with much greater ease, the effect of moral brutalization that is carried out in violent organizations such as criminal gangs and even certain military units (in the "Full Metal Jacket" style). These kinds of mechanisms were obviously already explored before the emergence of the academic discipline of psychology, but they have never been systematically used for the development of altruistic behavior in a genuine sense. History shows us some interesting cases regarding the deliberate change from antisocial to prosocial behavior, such as the "spiritual exercises" of the Jesuits... which in turn were inspired by Kempis's "Imitation of Christ". Religious behavior does not necessarily aim at altruistic behavior, but some religions deliberately emphasize aggression control strategies and practices of altruism and empathy. So far, no non-religious ideological movement has focused on this issue.

It makes no sense to be altruistic and at the same time dependent on prejudices and conventions.