Theoretically we could switch to a communist system if it was voted in.

Hey, theoretically we could vote to make all the black people property again. What percentage of the population is black?

This is why we are supposed to be living in a Constitutional Republic, not a pure democracy. A constitution says there are some things that are not subject to majority rule. If everybody except one person voted to reinstate slavery, it still would not count. The Constitution forbids it.

Had the Founding Fathers thought it would become an issue some day, one assumes they would have included some protection for wealth and property. As it is now, two-thirds of the function of the Federal government is dedicated to voting wealth away from a minority of voters and passing it, with great fanfare and adulation of the politicians, into the hands of a large majority of voters. If the Founding Fathers knew this would happen, the most benign symptom would be projectile vomiting. Especially when you told them the dollar amounts.

In our current society, with little restriction, I can "vote" to take your money, destroy your business, confiscate your property, or pretty much anything in the realm of economics. If I get enough people to agree with me, your wealth and property is meat to be tossed to the wolves.

What the US has that many of the floundering systems of capitalism do not have is a system of laws and regulation based on moral concepts of fair play. Capitalism as you described it does not include such concepts and that is the problem with unbridled capitalism from a democratic view.

Our capitalist system is SATURATED with concepts of fair play. Stop some time and think of all the things in your life that work right. And although it is an article of faith among the Left that if government did not crack down on commerce, that every last businessman on Earth would immediate begin killing and cheating his customers, in reality, this isn't true.

Of the hundreds of thousands of American businesses and corporations, how many were found to have engaged in criminal activity over the past few years? The idea that Enron is a condemnation of capitalism is like saying that because someone shoots someone else, that American citizens are all murderers by nature.

I believe business founders are entitled to whatever wealth their business accumulates as a reward for innovation and or hard work, but I do not believe hired managers should earn more than about 10 to 20 times the average pay of their employees. That is plenty of difference to provide motivation, but not high enough to make some of the outlandish kinds of manipulations we've seen lately very tempting. Most businesses in other countries do not pay outrageous CEO salaries as we do and many CEOs are getting these salaries despite poor performance. There is nothing in the basic theory of capitalism that accounts for this unless you truly believe that somehow these guys are all involved in tremendous bidding wars. I don't see much evidence for that. It appears to be much more of an abuse of accumulated power situation. This supports Robert's linear reward comments.

As far as the "maximum wage" canard goes, to be blunt, and paraphrasing a certain Lectroid, "it's not your goddam money, understand, monkeyboy?"

It seems to be almost impossible for liberals to realize that other people's pockets are not their playground,* and although I am sure you have a better and wiser use for the money, one that will enhance life for everyone around us, it's still not yours.

If somebody wants to pay a CEO a billion dollars a year, you have nothing to say about it. You can write articles, you can protest with a sign across the street. If you are a stockholder, you can make a stink, and in real life, the stockholders would do just that. Unless, of course, the CEO is actually worth a billion dollars. Most of the "outrageous" salaries are actually options and bonuses based on performance, and if a CEO raises the value of a company by a few billion dollars, a few million dollars in bonuses may look pretty good on the balance sheet.

If you look around, I think you'll find that poorly-performing companies that pay exorbitant executive salaries are not very common. And it certainly doesn't last. And yes, there is intense competition for successful CEOs.

I'm always amused that "other countries" are used as examples of how to run an economy. "Our taxes aren't nearly as high as those in Europe." "Europe has higher gas taxes." "Europe doesn't pay its CEOs as much." "Europe has the government pay for (insert almost anything here.)"

Hello? The economies of most European nations BLOW GOATS! Have you noticed? Using countries like France as an example of how to run an economy is like using the Titanic as an example of how to sail a ship.

*On reflection, I probably should have said "wallets," not "pockets."