The Instigator
MindMaster
Pro (for)
The Contender
usnish
Con (against)

Capitalism is better than socialism.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
usnish has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/12/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 872 times Debate No: 103931
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

MindMaster

Pro

Capitalism is better than socialism in many ways, first of all, it helps people out of poverty and increases minimum wage. People pay for themselves and not waste money on someone getting braces on the other side of the country, and like I said socialism is just paying for other peoples problems. Socialists might say "Oh, but were paying for education and healthcare, which will help children to learn." But the parents should pay for his or her child's education, not some 60 year old man who is playing bingo and is in retirement. It doesn't make sense. Everyone should pay for their own problems, not other people. Plus, socialism is destroying the economy piece by piece because apparently everything is free and they should pay less for their dumb mistakes and make other people pays for your problems. And if Socialists are okay with that? Then I dont know what else to say. Its like if the government forces you to buy milk for another person that your never going to use and you will never meet the person. And its nice when you hurt yourself and you dont have to pay for it, but for other people, its just a random stranger that you probably will never meet. Capitalists pay for their own problems, it will help them to learn from their mistakes. Capitalism helps with job opportunities, therefore helping poor people get jobs and then helping the economy, its a cycle. Nothing destroys poverty more than the economy. Due to capitalism and the growth of companies, it has lowered prices and given poor people a chance to buy food and other survival supplies. Maybe some poor person on the street gets like 10 dollars in a full day of begging on the street. Due to capitalism, they could afford probably 2 water bottles and bread, and maybe a bag of oranges. Now that person can continue with live and on a very lucky day he could maybe afford a jacket or a pair of clothes. His live has gotten way better due to capitalism. Now that hes gotten some clothes, water, and food, he can get a job and it changes his life. All thanks to capitalism. That is my turn, let me hear yours!
usnish

Con

Better? Absolutely not! Capitalism is not what many people think it is, neither is socialism. People think capitalism is good and perfect... Then why are there so many poor people starving on the streets? Why can't you pay your student loans? Why can't you pay for your health care? Why is the national debt increasing? Why 1% of american people control 40% of the wealth? All of these things are fixed with socialism. You get free health care, free education, free public transport, and sometimes free food. While in capitalism, the government doesn't care about your health care or that you are starving in the streets. And I'm talking about SOCIALIST countries, not COMMUNIST. Americans seem to mix them a lot ...
Say what you want about socialism, but when your economy fails, and your debt destroys you, next time you will see socialism the other way.No I do not agree I have nothing against Capitalism but I have a firm belief that Capitalism controls the world. In post civil rights America, Capitalism has really put a thorn in Black America. Racism and hatred don't come from people like you and me but rich politicians and businessmen/women. That why southern whites resented the free slaves because their freedom hurt their capitalism which at the time completely developed the south.
Debate Round No. 1
MindMaster

Pro

Okay, First of all, I am Canadian so there is socialism in my country. Second of all, Healthcare, education, etc. Is definitely not free, it is paid through taxes which is my point, many people think health care is free but it definitely isn't, if you take a look at Canada, your health care taxes are going to add up, so when you need to get an x-ray the one time when you break your leg, it's going to cost around $500 where when you pay taxes in Canada you need to pay $11,000 which might put you in debt based on your financial situation. "While in capitalism, the government doesn't care about your health care or that you are starving in the streets." They care about money, and when you care about money the economy is good. And it's not like Capitalism is saying poor people are bad, we still have plenty of good organizations and charities to help people. After Hurricane Harvey hit, tons of people would have gone into poverty because everything they had was destroyed. Yet in a capitalist country, the red cross helped tons of people. So Socialism may help them more but it's not like Capitalism doesn't help them at all. Like the lowering prices scenario, I explained in my last argument. Things are getting more affordable due to capitalism. So it's putting poor people out of the streets and it is good for the economy because companies are being forced to one-up each other in products, so then they lower their prices.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Surgeon 10 months ago
Surgeon
Since when do individuals who have lived in past generations have the right to determine what individuals in future generations must be forced to do?

It is one thing to want to help a fellow citizen from your own pocket, it is quite another to help a fellow citizen from someone elses pocket. Socialism entails force and legalised theft and is not some romanticized reflection of a social contract. It is a nauseating idea in theory and is always a disaster in practice.

I can agree that a government must exist to protect its citizens from the application of force either external or inetrnal force. It is a human right and expectation that we should be allowed to get on with our own lives and maximise our potential as individuals. But what right has any other individual to demand someone elses wealth becuase they seek more equality of outcome? In an unequal world, with unequal talents we expect there to be inequity. So you should focus on being the best you can be and not stealing from others.

We know only to well what happens when we try to force an equalisation of outcomes. It leads to loss of freedom and the loss of the engine of wealth creation. This is a double whammy that societies take decades to recover from (if they ever do). Under Socialism everyone becomes equally poor. Under Capitalism, the poor are richer in relative terms, but the important thing is that everyone has the opportunity to increase their wealth and benefit society and family.
Posted by Surgeon 10 months ago
Surgeon
Since when do individuals who have lived in past generations have the right to determine what individuals in future generations must be forced to do?

It is one thing to want to help a fellow citizen from your own pocket, it is quite another to help a fellow citizen from someone elses pocket. Socialism entails force and legalised theft and is not some romanticized reflection of a social contract. It is a nauseating idea in theory and is always a disaster in practice.

I can agree that a government must exist to protect its citizens from the application of force either external or inetrnal force. It is a human right and expectation that we should be allowed to get on with our own lives and maximise our potential as individuals. But what right has any other individual to demand someone elses wealth becuase they seek more equality of outcome? In an unequal world, with unequal talents we expect there to be inequity. So you should focus on being the best you can be and not stealing from others.

We know only to well what happens when we try to force an equalisation of outcomes. It leads to loss of freedom and the loss of the engine of wealth creation. This is a double whammy that societies take decades to recover from (if they ever do). Under Socialism everyone becomes equally poor. Under Capitalism, the poor are richer in relative terms, but the important thing is that everyone has the opportunity to increase their wealth and benefit society and family.
Posted by DrCereal 10 months ago
DrCereal
@Shad0w
Who gave the government the right to tax? Prior generations and the social contract.
Posted by Shad0wXx 10 months ago
Shad0wXx
I agree with @MindMaster here. Con seems to be under the illusion that socialism provides a "free lunch".
The things that socialism provides cost money, and that's money that people pay. Who says any government has a right to tax? The Government itself? Ponder that for a moment.
Posted by Debating_Horse 10 months ago
Debating_Horse
I should tell DrCereal about this! But so far very interesting!
Posted by Surgeon 10 months ago
Surgeon
It is somewhat surprising that after the complete collapse of the Socialist experiments across Eastern Europe, that so many Millenials see Socialism as an answer to the ills of the world. As someone said on this thread, no system is perfect, but one clearly leads to failure economically, politically and most importantly for the well being of humanity and the other doesn't.

It is not the purpose of the world, government or any other agency to ensure fairness of outcome. Nothing and no-one owes us anything, to think otherwise is a staggeringly self-entitled perspective. Inequiatble outcomes are expected when people have differing talents and backgrounds. First and foremost the point is: how does the individual maximise their talent?, and not how can we make everyone equal? Trying to make everyone equal the state stealing the money of its citizens, to the destruction of wealth creation, to economic chaos, to slavery of the individual to the state, then totalitarian rule and death camps.

All this was explained brilliantly by Hayek in the "Road to serfdom". We can see exactly this happening in real-time, in Venezeula. Even the "Communist" state of China, has reversed its previous disasterous policies and adopted full bore Capitalism (without political freedom obviously). It has led to massive growth, opportunity and economic freedom for its citizens.
Posted by MindMaster 10 months ago
MindMaster
ViceRegent, this is a political debate, not religious. Please comment only political things
Posted by ViceRegent 10 months ago
ViceRegent
If atheism is true, there is nothing objectively wrong with steeling.
Posted by SheBlindedMeWithScience 10 months ago
SheBlindedMeWithScience
bleep, socialism is a system where the government either directly controls (owns, as in nationalization) the means of production or indirectly controls the means of production (extremely high taxes and regulation).

But the real difference is in the underlying philosophy, everything else flows from that. Socialism (just like communism and marxism) is based on collectivist philosophy- that is, groups, rather than individuals, have rights. This is where the human rights abuses of the past have come from. Think, "To make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs". If the eggs are individuals and the omelet is the society, the omelet has has rights, but the eggs do not. So if Hitler needed to kill a few million people to perfect his society (in his eyes), or Chavez needed to expropriate the property of the shop keepers, it's in-keeping with collectivist philosophy.

Capitalism, on the other hand, is an individualist philosophy. It's marked by the allocation of rights (property, self-ownership, proceeds of your labor) to the individual. This is why human rights abuses are much less common in what pass for capitalist countries.

Neither Capitalism not Socialism are perfect, though i'm not sure what definition of perfect you could use to be universal. But from the 20th century one is CLEARLY better than the other.
Posted by Bleep 10 months ago
Bleep
From what I understand of capitalism and socialism (I'm sorry if my knowledge is a bit limited, please correct me if I'm wrong), socialism seems to be an economical system in which occupations, income, and work are all distributed equally among the community, there is little flexibility to it, and it doesn't always work out (see Cuba under Fidel Castro, and the Soviet Union). Capitalism would be more individual based, handing ownership of all the previously mentioned (income control, business protocol, work times, type of work, etc...) into the hands of private businesses; the government has little to no form of influence within these businesses; and they are free to act as they would like. This is how countries like America grew over the years. Capitalism allows people the freedom to begin what could be large enterprises from just what had been a small idea. (I'm sorry if I'm biased, again, correct me if I'm wrong) There are a few propaganda videos of these on YouTube. I encourage you to watch them to see how people of these two economies justify their side, but remember to not let it get too into your head.
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.