Ethics

So as some of you may know I am taking a class right now on Business Ethics. Currently we are discussing theories of philosophy. The two that we have reviewed thus far are Egoism and Utilitarianism. Here are my quick and summarized descriptions of the two theories.
Egoism – every person should/does serve their own self interests. Self-interest can be defined as anything a person “wants” to do.
Utilitarianism – every person should/does submit to the cause that will generate the greatest volume of happiness, with respect to every person that is affected by the cause.
I am not afraid to say I am much more an Egoist than a Utilitarian. My fundamental critique of Utilitarianism is that it doesn’t respect any unalienable rights. There is no rule that is greater than the “popular vote”. I believe Egoism is only flawed by fallibility, in other words people only make what we would commonly refer to as selfish decisions because they are missing information. I also believe that all people are born/created with certain rights that are not in anyway dependent on what will bring the “greatest net happiness”. I think there are some laws that are greater than the popular values. I would also say that Egoism is very complementary to capitalism. At its root capitalism suggests that the market or individual demands of the people will provide or lead to the greatest good. Of course this means that both the people creating the products/services and the people buying the products/services are serving only their own self-interest. My critique of Egoism is that it is too circular, since it is easy to say that people are serving their own self-interests by virtue of saying that anything they do is serving their own self-interest just by virtue of them doing it. This implies that the only people who are not Egoists are those that don’t do, or it could even be taken to the level that those that it includes all who exists and even those that don’t exist, since just by existing we are doing. Therefore I am more of an Ethical Egoist than a Psychological Egoist, the difference being that I believe people should serve their own self-interests but that the definition of self-interest is more defined and constrained than encompassing all that we do.
One very interesting subject that was brought up in class was the war in Iraq, I know hot topic but I thought it was very interesting. One person posed the question of how we evaluate or determine levels of happiness. Since most Americans, according to polls, want us out of Iraq we can conclude that it would increase happiness in America if we were to pull our troops out. However a true utilitarian has to consider the effect on the people in Iraq, how would their happiness be affected, and does it “count” for more or less than the American’s? The teacher suggested that the Iraqis happiness would be impacted much more than the average American therefore it would have to receive more weight, this led to another interesting problem and that is the quantification of future generations. How do we evaluate their happiness? It must be accounted for since they are affected, but does it hold the same value, and to what extent? This is a very common critique of Utilitarianism so it easier for me to rely on others to make this point, it also isn’t as personal to me.
So my question is; would you consider yourself an Egoist or Utilitarian? Why?