Capitalism is the best system to produce the best results

I thank you for that well thought out argument. Let me start with what I found to be your main comparison and argument against, that capitalism is blindly followed like, as you put it, religion. From what I understand, you believe that socialism is feasible if our mindsets are switched from personal goal to societies goal. Now, I don't want to get hung up on this critique because I feel the real fault with socialism lies with distribution. We individually, each have different preferences, goals, desires, etc, and to say that in a socialist system, you would just have to work towards a collective goal. The fact of the matter is, the only collective goals society has that is constant is physical needs; water, food, etc. Promoting socialist democracy means that at the very most we will neglect %49 of the population. Capitalism is not a form of government, so there can be capitalist dictatorships, and socialist democracies. Now, I really want to address that McDonald's remark. McDonald's has held the highest market share of fast food, but its not a monopoly. Places like Burger King, KFC, Taco Bell, have always been competing with McDonald's. More recently restaurants like Subway, Jimmy Johns, and others have appeared on the scene. The fact that I can be 7 cheese burgers for one hours wage (I'd like to avoid minimum wage as much as possible, to time consuming.) shows that competition works. Let's look at you innovation argument. Up until the 1800's, people made around $3, the modern equivalent of $3, even in the new United States and Britain. After 1800, income raised dramatically, and today the average American make $130 a day. What incentive do I have to spend hours of time on projects when I will only receive a fraction, a very tiny fraction, of the result of my labor. Now, you have to understand the difference between Capitalism and crony capitalism, or as I call it crapitalism. What Britain is doing is exploitation. You talk about the banking system. Most countries have a central bank, a government institution to control the interests rates, which I find appalling, In a free market, banks can't undergo risky investments, or engage in fraud, because they will go bankrupt. You say that the principal plus interest aggregated will always exceed the money supply. You are again referring to the crapitalism system we now have in place. If we where to increase the money supply along GNP, then you would be wrong. If we had a free banking system, where banks produce currency backed by commodities like gold and silver. In such a system, interest rates are set by supply and demand. The greater supply of money in reserve vs demand for loans, the lower interest rates. The lower the supply of money in banks vs demand, the higher the interest rate, discouraging borrowing. Here is why socialism is impossible: prices are information surrogates. Prices deliver information to consumers and producers on needed information like supply and demand. Without, disruptions start to occur. I want to delve more into this, but I need to know your brand of socialism in order to better address my position. Capitalism does have a reset button, its called a recession. Recessions are corrections in the market. However, if we pinpoint all recessions that have occurred without government interference, there are very few. [To the person in the comments] Government spending in research does not always produce desired results. Take for example the U.S. We should already have affordable solar energy, but we don't because government can't engage in risky projects. By best results, I mean best results out of anything else. In socialist countries you aren't going to see nice cars.