The Instigator
Jallen289
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
KikoSanchez182
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Capitalism is superior

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,084 times Debate No: 14983
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

Jallen289

Pro

Obviously, I believe that Capitalism is the superior system.

My opponent can have the first and last words.
KikoSanchez182

Con

I am not sure what you are comparing it to. If you are comparing it to any other system, and not limiting to me a specific system, I will argue it is not superior and will argue why in the following rounds.
Debate Round No. 1
Jallen289

Pro

Sorry for the delay. I will give my opponent the oppertunity to go first in this debate as I will not need that more than one argument to debate this topic.


KikoSanchez182

Con

KikoSanchez182 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Jallen289

Pro

Capitalism : “ an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.” (1)



Following hurricane Katrina, private donations surpassed the $1 billion mark within one month. (2) These donations went to private aid organizations that immediately provided relief. FEMA however, handed out $6.3 billion in taxpayer money, with nearly a quarter of that going to scammers. FEMA gave cash to inmates, sent checks to people who said they lived in cemeteries or post office boxes, and “reimbursed” people for rent even though they were living in hotels that were already being paid for by FEMA. (3) FEMA also “lost” 381 debit cards that later were occasionally used for purchases that “did not appear to meet legitimate disaster needs.” (4)


Bigger government is a socialist idea and the idea that we need the government to help us out of our problems is absurd, and not only in my opinion but evident by the actions of FEMA.


Communist countries fail. Socialist countries fail. Countries that implement capitalist procedures, while they are not perfect, do have the greatest chance to succeed. The free market system gives the citizens the best chance to succeed.


I’ll keep this short and close with this.


1964 – “War on Poverty”


1968 – 13% of Americans were poor


1968-1980 – Social welfare increased by 400%


1980 – 13% of Americans are still poor.



Obviously the government is not the answer here. We need the least amount of government as possible, but still enough to enforce laws, foreign and domestic. The government needs to be out of the way of the free market and let it run its process.


I’ll post a more in depth argument if my opponent posts something.




(1)http://www.merriam-webster.com...


(2)http://www.usatoday.com...


(3)http://www.boston.com...


(4)www.gao.gov/htext/d06844t.html


(5)http://www.books.google.com...

KikoSanchez182

Con

*sorry if there are spelling/grammar errors, the timer is running out and I will try to get as much in as I can*

I thank my opponent for this debate. Unfortunately, his proposition is based on a false premise and furthermore a system that will likely be limited to our era and technology. The false premise of the supremacy of capitalism is that we live in a world of unlimited resources. We obviously do not. Capitalism has everything revolving around valueless and relative supply of faith-backed paper money. In reality, the only true and relevant gauge of worth and value is in the amount of resources you hold. Paper money, and therefore our economy, is in no way tied to our limited resources here on earth. While capitalism is good in many aspects, it fails to uphold pro's superiority claim (above all other possible systems) because it fails to take into account our most important accounting figure - earth's resources.

"A study by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), to be released on Tuesday, warns that the human race is plundering the planet at a pace that outstrips its capacity to support life." (1) Twisting a famous quote just right, you can come up with, "the capitalist will sell you the rope by which he hangs himself". By this I mean capitalism, while a nice medium by which to exchange goods and services, is blind to the larger picture of overall resources. Take oil, for instance. It is possibly the one most important thing keeping the world economy going, yet we are far out pacing the supply with growing demand. (2) Now, this isn't horribly disastrous given that we can replace oil with another viable energy source. Given time, we may be able to. Unfortunately, capitalism does not take note of such obstacles as resource limitations. This could lead to, as many fear, a post-peak oil economic crash, rising prices worldwide, and many wars over the remaining oil. The world has yet to fight over such a valuable and vital resource as oil currently is, the outcome could be truly devastating to the future of mankind.

What is worse is that most current estimates are based on current levels of production. For many years, only the west and a few other areas, such as Japan, have been fully modernized and consuming at high levels. Now, we have a much larger resource problem looming with a few billion Chinese and Indians stepping into western-style modernity. Throw on top of that, that much of future world growth will also come from other currently less industrialized areas, such as Africa and other areas of Asia.

Unfortunately, I must wrap this up quickly due to the clock running out on me. There are certainly other areas we could get into, such as the problem of worldwide hunger, despite there being enough food on earth for 2,700 calories a day per person! (3) Lastly, capitalism is largely based on and works because most of humanity works for money. Though only speculation, most assume in the near future there will be very few jobs that will require human input, some estimate 3-5% of jobs. The rest will be done by computers and robots, which are much more efficient, work for no pay, never take a sick day, and can work 24-7-365, for the most part. Once 95% of humanity no longer works for a paycheck, the concept of bartering with money and the entire exchange system currently in place will likely become obsolete.

Pro has let me argue that capitalism is superior to any other system. Since capitalism fails to be based on and take into account natural resources, it is ultimately lacking in long-term viability. Therefore, it cannot be the most supreme system possible. A system, such as a resource-based economy, capable of such things, would be superior for our long-term survival. Thank you.

1 - http://www.guardian.co.uk...
2 - http://en.wikipedia.org...
3 - http://www.worldhunger.org...
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by KikoSanchez182 5 years ago
KikoSanchez182
Shall anyone ever vote??
Posted by Jallen289 5 years ago
Jallen289
Thanks for the debate. I'd like to add that Capitalism has been around many generations and history has proven my debate.

Have fun in the snow.
Posted by KikoSanchez182 5 years ago
KikoSanchez182
I see in the second sentence of my first paragraph I opened with 2 points of contention. Yet, I failed to reference the second contention in that same opening paragraph. It is referenced, at last, in the 2nd-to-last paragraph. Sorry for the mess.
Posted by KikoSanchez182 5 years ago
KikoSanchez182
Finished with 30 seconds to spare, lol. Off to snowboard! Look forward to reading the comments when I return in a few days. Best of luck, Jallen.
Posted by Jallen289 5 years ago
Jallen289
Also, I'm not big on attacking people for reliable sources. On any given debate, one person will often find the sources of his opponent to be biased when in reality it's difficult for two people, on opposite sides of the spectrum to agree that a source is biased or not.
Posted by Jallen289 5 years ago
Jallen289
I will go ahead and post my first argument and we can go from there.
Posted by Jallen289 5 years ago
Jallen289
I'd like to argue that Capitalism has done more good for the United States than any other system could, or has for any other country. When I say Capitalism, I mean Conservative Capitalism. There are forms of Socialist Capitalism that do not mirror the form of Capitalism I am referring to.

Either way, you can argue however you'd like.

I will source the majority of my information and would expect the same from any opponent.

Moreover, good luck. Look forward to it.
No votes have been placed for this debate.