Because most people would like to get rich, and would also prefer a decent economy.
They're dreaming - the likelihood of a poor getting rich is exceedingly remote. A more reasonable course of action would be to vote in 'Eurosocialism'.
Seems to me that you've made a hard left turn from capitalist, to democrat to socialist. May I ask what brought that about?
Nothing's really changed - I always thought capitalism was great for the upper class. I always had a fairly marxist understanding of how the economy works. However now I'm just making the point that the majority of people would be voting in their economic interest if they voted for some redistribution.
'Marxist' and 'understanding' probably shouldn't be used in the same sentence.
I don't know why libertarians are so reluctant to face the fact that Capitalism, while it works exceedingly well for the top few percent of the population (primarily the owners), is not particularly helpful for the lower classes. You can still prefer it, just be honest about its effects.
I have never once stated that capitalism has no drawbacks, however I believe that in the long run it benefits more people than any other system. I'm perfectly honest about it - my perception is just highly different than yours. It is my belief that the poor do benefit greatly from capitalism - it brings things that increase their quality of life within their reach that they could previously never have had. You are the one who seems to be in denial IMHO.
"The capitalist engine is first and last an engine of mass production which unavoidably means also production for the masses. . . . The capitalist achievement does not typically consist in providing more silk stockings for queens but in bringing them within the reach of factory girls for steadily decreasing amounts of effort." - Joseph Schumpeter
