That's an unfortunate attitude. I thought a lot like you, but when I realized the wage disparity here - I could afford to go eat at these fancy places, which my servers definitely could not - I chose to make it my problem.
Other people's problems are not yours, but if you can choose to help (for example, if you can afford to help), you should.
Now, I'm not suggesting they provide any less of a service, but I've eaten at taco carts that expect the same level of tipping (15-20%). These are places that the server definitely _could_ also eat at. If they are making the same amount of money (and possibly more), why is it still the customers responsibility to tip? At that point it isn't for the employee to make up for low wages. It is also usually paid prior to receiving your food, so it isn't for improved service. In this case the business could increase the base price and reject tips. If they directed that money to employees it would make budgeting easier for them and make no difference to the customers.
The problem with this is that by tipping you simply move the problem of underpaid waiters to the next customer and to the next day. If everyone just stopped tipping, the tips would be included in the prices, everybody would be paying taxes, and the tipping issue would just cease to exist. The prices would stay more or less the same, as those are the prices that people are willing to pay, whether the tip is already included or not.
That is not my understanding of how the world works.
At the same time, the vast majority of the jobs don't warrant tips- including all waitressing jobs outside the US- and this doesn't prevent workers from making a living wage out of them.
So yes, I think that if people stopped tipping, owners would be forced to pay waiters more, and raise their prices accordingly, as everybody already does elsewhere. On the other end, it's true that waiters might end up making less money, as the revenue-sharing model might be unreasonably generous in some cases.