I get the feeling people think Capitalists are cold heartless bastards. We are not. We care about all people as much as Socialists do, we just find our approach better for all involved. Here is an example of something smaller, that should illustrate my point.

I used to work an a restaurant when I was going through school. This was a large place, with good high quality food. In the state it was in when I worked there, they probably brought in 3 million a year gross. This restaurant was also part of a big chain. I am not sure the exact amount, but let's say the owner wanted to spend a total of 10% gross for his managers. In my restaurant, we had 5. One general, and 4 assistants.

The way the system was setup, is the general made a lot more then the rest. He made 140k, while the other for made 40k (for a total of 300k, or 10%). Also, General managers in this chain were only recruited from within. The deal was, everyone had to take the 40k a year job, and work harder then the rest to get the 140k a year job. It was setup that way on purpose, so the managers would work harder so they could get the really high paying job.

Now, a socialist would think, “if all 5 people were doing the same basic job, pay them all the same”. Why pay the GM so much more then the rest. The reason is output. If there was no reward for busting your ass, people would not do it. If they all made 60K, why work hard enough to become GM's.

Here's the real problem... if they were not working so hard to get that job, the quality of the work they did do would be less. If those 5 did not work hard at hiring the right people, buying the best food, building the right marketing campaigns, filling in for cooks or wait staff because they were short, making sure the bathrooms were clean, greeting customers to make sure there experience was tip notch, and so on, the business would have suffered. If they were not working so hard, the restaurant might have only brought in 1.5 million a year.

If the owner is only paying 10% of gross for there salaries, and now business has dropped to half because the restaurant is not what it used to be, he can only afford to pay each manager 30K a year.

So while they are now all “fair” by a socialists standards, every one of them loses income. Not only do they make less, any chance of becoming the guy who makes a lot is gone. There future is set.

These are the reasons Capitalists feel the poor are much better off in a capitalistic society, then a socialistic one. It has nothing to do with not liking the poor, and everything to do with wanting more for them.

lol, wrong place

What does this have to do with gaming?

TOO SERIOUS STUFF DOESN'T BELONG HERE

I love talking politics but you have to put this in the right place as others have said.

This really should be in the off-topic discussion section, but while I have the chance, here's my piece:

I agree with certain aspects of capitalism. Those who do a certain job better than someone else should get higher rewards, no question.

The aspects of capitalism that I personally despise have to do with the output, rather than the 'input', as it were. Having such a capitalist society has, in turn, implanted the regime that money is all that matters, and that you are of a higher social standing or are somehow a 'better person' if you make more money than someone else.

THAT is the part of capitalism that I despise.

lol, clicked the wrong button... can someone move this?

Off-topic

and I think you're confusing socialists with communists.

This is the wrong place for this and the thread should be forcibly moved or closed.

Depends what you mean by socialism, but if you're talking market socialism, where employees and managers' income depends on outcompeting other firms, production wouldn't necessarily drop off.  One way of implementing the system is issuing shares (part ownership of the company) to employees: then they work harder than regular restaurant workers under a fully capitalist business, because if the business thrives the workers make more.

But does a capitalist issue small amounts of shares to long term workers?  It'll make them work harder.  But wait, it may cause him to end up with less money in real terms because he must cut others into the profit.  The capitalist doesn't do it.  He wants to profit as much as possible, as fast as possible.  It's greed.

The only problem with the more inclusive or socialistic model is the initial capitalization.  All the younger, poorer people who'd work at a restaurant seldom can get together, pool their money, get a loan, and start the business.  And if the initial capital has to come from a capitalist, he is NOT going to agree to give part ownership to others if it lessens his overall take at all, UNLESS his values are somewhat collectivist (i.e. he believes that people working for higher wages might outweigh his desire to always get back the absolute most on his investment...note in your example the 10% for wages is a fixed immutable number, for some reason).  Hence, restaurants are run like the ones you worked at.