The Instigator
erika.danart
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Nidhogg
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

A new economic model which exceeds capitalism and socialism failures

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Nidhogg
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/11/2012 Category: Economics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,001 times Debate No: 28085
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

erika.danart

Pro

Capitalism is failing now like the former economic models, because it hasn't been applied in the correct way, because powerful people who take the lead have been acting in an abusive and selfish way, and no one has tell them nothing. Because the seven richest people control more richness that the combined GDP of the poorest 41 nations. Because just 20% of the global population consumes the 86% of the market products. This is unfair, but not because the system has failed, but because humans are not infallible, and we need to have authorities that apply rules to us, but in this case there is no one who can apply them to all, talking about the powerful class, is a shame that we talk about equality when we do not apply this concept at all. There is not an interest in the common well being. Now socialism tried in a past time to force us to be equal, but neither that is the solution, because then everybody loses freedom to control their own destiny, and is not fair either. I believe that being rich is not a sin, but having the means to help people, and when you see they are suffering, but you choose to ignore this and making more and exploiting more, then that's wrong.
Nidhogg

Con

I am interested in seeing where this debate goes.

I will only supply one rebuttal in his round, as I only need one.

My opponent has not followed her own stated purpose. She says in the debate title: "A new economic model which exceeds capitalism and socialism failures" She has not provided this supposed "model". Until this is changed, Pro has not fufilled her BOP in this debate. I hope this chages, as I find this topic very intruiging.
Debate Round No. 1
erika.danart

Pro

I apologize if I didn't make myself clear.
In 1930 the Great Depression happened, and this was overcome by capitalism, however government started to intervene in the economy and a new model was created: Keynesian Economics; where the Estate could take matters in their hands, because they were aware of the iniquities that could happen because of capitalism total freedom.
Now apparently everything was fine, but in 1973 with the oil crisis the neoliberalists attacked the Keynesian politic. They argued that the budget for social well being was too exaggerated and so they didn't invest too much in the market, and that was the reason it didn't grow and thanks to that the crisis came.
The consequences were: higher unemployment rate, because if more unemployed people more labor supply offer, that implies paying lower wages and more profit for the employer.
Also the taxation for the employers decreased, and the privatization occurred. Many unions were destroyed and the budget for social programs was cut. This caused a very profound gap between rich and poor.
That's why this is called economic Darwinism, because only the strongest survives.
The powerful people set the rules and the majority risks everything, that is how it works. Unfortunately this is at global scale, and the same that happens with individuals happens with nations, in a phenomenon we called globalization, where the richest countries take advantage of poor nations, making trades that are designed for making profits just for them.
Marx said that history was social class struggle, I just agree with him in this part, not in socialism. But if we want a stable economy we must make sure that the majority is in well state.
There should be a strong balance, but the priority is to give liberty and security for people, not market. Taxes should be the same for everyone. An economy regulation must be made. We must de privatize everything that was of the common people and now is just of a few who can afford it.
I'm not against market freedom, but you must put people first above all.
And the government should regulate this, because at the end the government is not a politician, but an institute that represents people.
We must be honest, capitalism right now is being treated as democratic, we should redirect it.
"It's wrong to deprive someone else of a pleasure so that you can enjoy one yourself, but to deprive yourself of a pleasure so that you can add to someone else's enjoyment is an act of humanity by which you always gain more than you lose."
― Thomas More
Nidhogg

Con

I agree, but once again, what is your argument? We can't debate a narrative. Do you have a model of how this will work, or is this just a rhetorical debate?
Debate Round No. 2
erika.danart

Pro

erika.danart forfeited this round.
Nidhogg

Con

The Forfeit speaks for itself.
Have a nice day.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
erika.danartNidhoggTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture...