The Instigator
jvenia
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Theunkown
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Capitalism is good

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 3 votes the winner is...
Theunkown
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/24/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 754 times Debate No: 65729
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

jvenia

Pro

This is only suppose too be a short debate
Theunkown

Con

Pro must state his arguments before I can do anything else since he has to prove Capitalism is good before I have the ability to rebut his points and show how capitalism is bad.
Debate Round No. 1
jvenia

Pro

Capitalism, gives everyone an opportunity. Some may argue that this is not true because some people get paid more than others, but those that get paid little can try to get better job or even start there own business, there is no one saying they can't, but there will be competition. Capitalism also creates motivation and competition, which moves an economy forward.
Theunkown

Con

Capitalism, gives everyone an opportunity.
I dont think Capitalism has given an opportunity for everyone. We have a few rich people in the world who can get their kids a good education and a higher amount of middle class people who can afford a somewhat decent education and then you have 3 billion people who live on less than 2.50$ a day[1].

There are hundreds of millions of families that cannot afford to send their kids to school because they need the kids to work what menial jobs they can to earn just enough money to survive.
Hundreds of millions of kids who cannot afford an education and cannot pursue a career.

Think about it, we lose many potential doctors, scientists and other people who can change the world for the better. The kid who is smart enough to find the cure for cancer may be dead or dying because his/her family is in extreme poverty and cannot afford to feed him, much less afford to get him education and an opportunity in life.



but those that get paid little can try to get better job or even start there own business, there is no one saying they can't

If only those that get paid little could have afforded education.


Capitalism also creates motivation and competition

Capitalism also creates the motivation to loot from people. It creates incentive for a company like Walmart and McDonalds to pay its workers less as they get more money.

Capitalism makes people take jobs they hate just for the money and not because they are passionate about it, which not only hurts the economy, but lowers the quality of life of many individuals.

Besides its not like the socialist USSR did not innovate new technologies, its not like the USSR did not have motivation to advance their nation.


Moreover, if a business has a monopoly, there will be no competetition and any new businesses will not gain ground in the market, thus ending the careers of what could have been very competant businessmen. This is not the dream of opportunity that is regularly portrayed in Capitalism.


Sources:

[1] http://www.globalissues.org...;
Debate Round No. 2
jvenia

Pro

First of Capitalism does give everyone an opportunity, there are number of people that dropped out of school and still became successful. I was born in Brazil with my single mom making around $4.50 an hour. I was still able too get an education, through scholarships, now I'm about to go to med school. Its not easy, but then most stuff aren't.

Second Motivation is what drives people to become successful. If wealth was distributed and everyone made the same amount of money, then what would be the motivation of starting a business and working hard, if you could be lazy and make just as much? This would cause businesses to stop being created and cause economic collapse.

Thirdly, Competition, is when businesses, compete to be the best. In order for a business to become the best, it must create new ways to make its product or service, more affordable, or better, this creates innovations.
Theunkown

Con

I was born in Brazil with my single mom making around $4.50 an hour. I was still able too get an education, through scholarships

Yes there are scholarships but then there are millions of people who cannot go to school not because of costs, but because they need to work and earn money to be able to eat.

there are number of people that dropped out of school and still became successful.

The number is far too low to be significant. I don't see why most people should not become sucessful. Its not like they do not have their own talent or something worth contributing to society.

then what would be the motivation of starting a business and working hard, if you could be lazy and make just as much?

There is no financial incentive yes. But that is not a bad thing. This is because doctors are not just doctors because it makes more money but because they are passionate about the job (many people are) and this is true for many important professions.

Also, can we not survive without businesses? Governments can manage businesses and distribute products according to what the people need (as long as they are honest citizens and not criminals or something). People who actually have a passion for business can become the managers of government owned industries.

If anything Gov. owned businesses will uphold corporate social responsibility whilst pure free market economies will not require businesses to uphold their social responsibilites.


Thirdly, Competition, is when businesses, compete to be the best. In order for a business to become the best, it must create new ways to make its product or service, more affordable, or better, this creates innovations.

I already addressed this issue. Capitalism, especially pure free market capitalism, is extremely vulnerable to monopolies in which case the competetion would essentially stop. Alternatively, the USSR was pretty innovative, especially when it came to the space race.



Conclusion:

- Free Market capitalism will almost certainly result in evironmentally and socialy irresponsible businesses (which we see today).
- Capitalism does not necessarily have competition since the market is vulnerable to monopolies.
- Circumstance and luck play a larger role in success rather than a person's ability under Capitalism.
- There may be no financial incentive without capitalism, however there will still be passionate incentive which is far stronger than financial incentive (we will see better quality doctors, teachers etc).
- Not all people are given an opportunity under Capitalism.
-Therefore Capitalism is not good.

The resolution is negated, I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Theunkown 1 year ago
Theunkown
My god, I can't believe I actually argued for government ownership.
I still believe in Socialism, but I believe in Market Socialism and worker's co-operatives and not govts.
The arguments I made a year ago still stand however, if anything I feel that they are more valid for democratic market socialism than for state owned socialism (or state capitalism).
Posted by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
@Alpacthulhu
" You also assume that people do particular jobs only because they enjoy them, rather than because they want money. "
No i dont, I assume that people do particular jobs because they want money, rather than because they enjoy them (other way around from what you said). But under a more economically egalitarian society, people will obviously do the job they like.
Posted by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
Yeah my question was ironic.
Posted by Alpacthulhu 2 years ago
Alpacthulhu
'Wtong' is, but other than that, nothing much. Certainly not any worse than his/hers.

Despite the fact that I agree more with the capitalist side, I tend to go for socialists in debates because more often than not, capitalists in debates just call socialists commies and start randomly insulting the opponent.

I was pleased to see that he didn't do that this time, and that he actually made a good argument.
He messed up when he made it 3 rounds, though, because he couldn't make a rebuttal on that stuff you said at the end, such as how you didn't point out that you could just take on copious amounts of student loans to work off if you really wanted to go to school. You also assume that people do particular jobs only because they enjoy them, rather than because they want money. I'm sure any number of pollsters would be raring to disagree, though this is an elementary opinion and can't really be disproven.
Posted by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
What's wtong with my spelling/grammar?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Flipbook 2 years ago
Flipbook
jveniaTheunkownTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:12 
Reasons for voting decision: Confusing topic, "capitalism is good" is a good debate, but it has its kinks, not convinced of anything,
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
jveniaTheunkownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: con fully refutes pro, with sources too.
Vote Placed by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
jveniaTheunkownTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I saw two main arguments in the debate. I shall address both. 1) That capitalism gives everyone opportunity. PRO supported this position by bare assertion and anecdote. There was no evidence, no data , no sources, and no real argument to support it. CON, on the other hand, excellently refuted this point by pointing out the inequitable distribution of wealth and the inability of many impoverished people to profit. 2) Capitalism creates competition and motivation to drive the economy. This is true. However, CON pointed out potential problems as well (such as looting and wealth hoarding). PRO dropped both of these rebuttals. CON also demonstrated how command-based economies, like the USSR, could also innovate. PRO dropped this as well. CON argued extremely well and deserves this win. For PRO, in the future, I recommend supporting arguments with evidence and detail.