Capitalism vs socialism
Debate Rounds (4)
Socialism doesn't work:
Historically it hasn't worked, the socialist Nazi party of Germany didn't do well, neither did the USSR, also socialist. I will now explain in more detail:
Let's use china as an example:
uried amid its astonishing annual growth rate, even in the recession, is the sad story of China�€™s socialist sector, a huge and perennial drag on its economy. The failure of government control amid the success of private initiative is a story that President Obama would do well to study as he brings government control and management to the automobile and banking industries in the United States.
In China, 80 percent of all investment activity comes from bank loans largely controlled by the government �€" a harbinger of what Obama will bring to the United States as TARP-funded banks increasingly have to bow to federal regulation and pressure. And, as is to be expected when the state runs the banks, the lending goes disproportionately to state-owned enterprises (read: General Motors). These companies get 70 percent of the nation�€™s investment capital (and the figure is rising) but only produce between one-quarter and one-third of all output in the country.
An article by John Lee explains that China�€™s �€œm
ove towards an unbalanced state-led model did not occur by accident but was the result of deliberate policy�€� in the wake of the Tiananmen Square demonstrations. Prior to Tiananmen �€" when 80 percent of the poverty alleviation China has experienced took place �€" fixed-asset investment by the private sector grew at 20 percent per year. Since then, it has dropped to almost half that level. 
In doing so, he might consider the total failure of the Chinese economy�€™s state-controlled sector, a drag on its overall privately induced sensational economic growth. 
Also America has the #1 economy in the world, even in our resecion. 0
Also next round I may have my own blog with a socialism post, and i will be used as a source If it is ready.
State-socialism doesn't work and it never will. But let�€™s prove it by following this theory through. The government (representing the poor masses) sets about to run the economy. This is the only way the "factors of production", which the government took off the rich, can be made public. You can leave them to the market and private hands, or you can have the government do it. There is no third option. Now let�€™s see how the government does trying to run the economy.
Such an approach is doomed to failure for a number of reasons:
Complexity �€" A national economy is overwhelmingly complex. For example, America has over 20,000 different job categories (ref). To co-ordinate these by central diktat is probably impossible and certainly so within a reasonable time-frame.
Frankly, it is socialist economics, though you can try to paper over that fact all that you want.
When a government intervenes in a market, it upsets the dynamics of a market and forces inefficiencies. In fact, I would strongly argue that government is responsible for the high health care costs today. 
Go to my 2 source for more info
That is it for now, now capitalism and why it works, and better than socialism. Plus definitions (forgot to to give them above)
Want to see how the great "socialism experiment" worked? Go ask Greece! Their failed socialist wealth-state policies have done them in:
Challenges facing Greece:
� Debt/GDP ratio of over 150%, forecast to be 170% by 2013. 
Socialism revolves around you live of of someone elses money, sounds good, or does it?
You can't promise the moon forever. Eventually as the quote says: "you run out of other people's money". 
Capitalism, on the other hand, isn't perfect. But it creates prosperity for individuals and for the economy. It gets businesses and individuals investing for the future.
Capitalism works best because it is the only social and economic system that aligns itself with the combined human spirits of achievement, ambition, self-improvement, individualism, self-esteem, and initiative.
This means less government intervention!
Ronald Reagan was dead on when he said:
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
This is not the way to get America prosperous again. We need to get people working again! We need smaller government, less social programs, and to get back to our American roots. Our country was founded upon faith, hope, and love. We, as a country, have tried so hard to keep God out of our country, but it is He who made us great. Without Him, we are just people. But through Him, we are extraordinary people who can accomplish almost anything. 
Also people in capitalist society's are more wealthy on average.
US vs Canada
US=$45,759.46 per capita
Canada=$38,065.13 per capita
So almost 10,000 less
Japan (capitalist) vs China (socialist capitalist mix)=
Japan= $33,523.37 per capita
China=$7,368.68 per capita
South korea vs Croatia:
SK= $24,589.77 per capita
Croatia= $15,487.46 per capita
So in a capitalist society your pretty well off.
This is it for now, good luck.
DEFINITION: SOCIALISM: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
IN MARXIST THEORY: the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
ADVANTAGES OF SOCIALISM:
1.EQUALITY OF OPPURTUNITY: Socialism promotes the formation of a classless society in which equal opportunities are provided to all, this also helps in maximising the potential of each individual, and this view is shared by technocratic socialists. EQUALITY OF OUTCOME: this concept is based on the belief that each and every role in society is vital, this advocates equal distribution of rewards and equal powers in decision making, thus also promoting the formation of a classless, self – sufficient society, this view being shared by communal utopian socialists. Socialism essentially helps in reducing the gap between the rich and poor. Equality is an extremely vital part of a progressing nation. Hence socialism is an effective tool which helps in the creation of equality between the citizens of a nation.
2.ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES AND EFFICIENCY: The wealth of the earth belongs to all men or none. Capitalism advocates the concentration of wealth, resources and power in the hands of few people. These people are already well off and hence will have little incentive to use their resources efficiently, thus giving way to the growth of a grossly inefficient economic system. Socialism, on the other hand promotes the equal and/or equitable distribution of wealth, resources and power in the hands of community at large, giving each man the need to work hard for the progress of himself as an individual as well as for the progress of community at large. In a socialist system work becomes a free activity and the people receive the full fruits of their labour. Socialism also helps in the removal of middlemen and the creation of syndicates – this helps to uplift the citizens of that nation.
3.HUMANITY: The values of kindness, honesty and goodwill for all, are what set humans physiologically apart from animals, these values are showcased throughout the system of socialism. A metaphoric example - Wild animals are in continuous search for prey; they are always searching, killing and hunting in an extremely barbaric manner. In a jungle, for example, the animals highest in the food chain eventually are the ones that survive the fray; this is very similar to the concept and ideology of capitalism which promotes the concentration of resources in the hands of few people. The weak animals, exist in large numbers, are exploited by the larger stronger animals present in fewer number. This is synonymous to the system of capitalists viewing workers to be commodities, which should be exploited for the main aim of private profits. Socialism on the other hand sheds light on the physiological evolution of man from a primitive uncivilized being. Here all people are offered equal opportunities which they can use to maximise their talent and the resources available. An individual not only works hard for his own progress, but also for the progress of society as a whole. The distribution of power and the ownership of the means of production in the hands of the workers, described by Karl Marx as the sole producers of wealth. Thus in socialism both the values of humanity and the system of an efficient economy (explained in point 2) is promoted. As you mentioned in your argument, I'm quoting now, ‘Our country was founded upon faith, hope and love. (the ‘our' referring to The United States Of America ), the above paragraph clearly explains how Socialism promotes the ideas of humanity and shows its progress, hence proving that a Socialist structure of government would be more suitable.
4.CULTURAL AND SOCIAL BENEFITS: Capitalism causes the degradation of artisans and craftsmen, to routine machine-like work. Capitalism has absolutely no space for the natural or acquired talent of people. Division of labour is a cruel tool used by capitalists in order to maximise profits and reduce the value of a worker, hence also reducing their wages. Socialism on the other hand advocates the participation of individuals in the activities of society, this system is both individualistic as well as collective in nature, individualistic as workers are not considered or referred to as the ‘collective mob' employed by a minority of owners, means of production are now in the hands of the workers, thus work becomes a free activity, with each worker enjoying the full fruits of his labour. It is collective in nature as means of production are owned and controlled by society and not a minority of capitalists. Socialism promotes the participation of individuals in society and encourages them to use their resources, talents and assets in the direction of social as well as individual progress. Socialism thus enables full participation of individuals in the intellectual, cultural and political aspects of society.
5.WAY OF LIFE: In a socialist system, society is ruled and controlled by the people, why would anyone choose another system of living? In a capitalistic system, society is ruled by money, why would anyone want to live under such conditions? A system where money is chief the controlling factor in society just further showcases the lack of humanity and the severe degradation of human nature.
6.SOCIALISM FOR THE GREATER GOOD: Socialism has provisions and rights for the welfare of people, like the right to work, the right to education, the right to free health care at the point of use etc.; these rights are reflected in welfare models of democracies all over the globe and are also showcased in a socialist system, thus implying that to attain the main goals of a democratic system of government, a socialist system is a necessity. Why should a minority of the population (the capitalists) be given the license to block the progress of society as a whole towards the goals of freedom and equality?
7.COMPARISON OF CAPITALIST AND SOCIALIST MONOPOLIES: Capitalist monopolies lead to certain individuals earning obscene amounts of profits, by selling products and services at exorbitant prices. Citizens of that capitalist nation have no other way of obtaining those goods and services and hence are forced to comply with the obscene prices charged on goods all in the name of having a capitalist economy. Socialist monopolies on the other hand are benign, since the state has the interests of citizens as well as society at large at heart rather than the enrichment of a particular individual.
8.AIM OF SOCIALIST ECONOMIES: Socialist economies are well planned and focus more on human happiness and unity rather than the glorification or gratification of a relatively small group of the population of a nation. A socialist system of governance helps to gain respect, wealth and position in society for all rather than a minority of the population , this displays social control – the excesses of capitalism will forever mean that while some may kiss the stars too many will fall by the wayside, the weak are downtrodden and left behind and forgotten. Capitalist economies are money-driven without much regard for people unless they are owners or shareholders of business firms. In a capitalist economy, there is fierce competition and, perhaps, unfair competition. There is a tendency, in capitalist economies, for big companies to get bigger and for monopolistic behaviour to occur. Unfair labour practices may occur since companies are driven by the profit motive. Since capitalism requires continual growth, environmental damage may occur as the resources of the earth are depleted. Some say capitalism makes the rich richer, and the poor poorer.
FACTS AND FIGURES
1.THE DEBT CRISIS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: America is a capitalist nation and is now in a great debt crisis, the national debt sums up to over 15,000,000,000,000 dollars. - http://www.usdebtclock.org... . – The site provides in detail the actual figures of the US National Debt.
2.China, a socialist nation, owns the largest amount of foreign debt in The United States Of America – the total amounting to - $1134.1 billion dollars (as of October 2011) – this is elaborated in the site - http://www.davemanuel.com.... The site also elaborates the growth of American debt -
3.The United States Of America also showcase a large number of bank failures with their capitalist economy. - 2010 - 157
2009 - 140
2008 - 30
2007 - 3
2006 - 0
2005 - 0
2004 - 4
2003 - 3
2002 - 11
2001 - 4
2000 - 7
1999 - 8
1998 - 3
1997 - 1
1996 - 6
1995 - 8
1994 - 15
1993 - 50
1992 - 181
1991 - 271
1990 - 382
1989 - 534
1988 - 470
1987 - 262
1986 - 204
1985 - 180
1984 - 106
1983 - 99
1982 - 119
1981 - 40
1980 - 22
1979 - 10
1978 - 7
1977 - 6
1976 - 17
1975 - 13
1974 - 4
1973 - 6
1972 - 2
1971 - 7
1970 – 7
So much for a capitalist economy being efficient!
4.A global debt clock too proves that capitalist countries, (America) have greater debt crises than socialist countries (China). Even though each individual person may earn more in a capitalist country, the nation as a whole progresses more with a socialist system of government, with alongside relatively good progress of the individual. – The clock is displayed at the site - http://www.economist.com... .
5.The Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway, etc.) are consistently rated the best places to live - and they are, perhaps, the most Socialist countries out there right now. For instance, Sweden takes about 51% of the average citizen's income, yet Swedish citizens are arguably more content and happy with their lives than we are. Germany can also be added to the Socialist list, although more capitalist than the Scandinavian countries (and also ranked right below them on a list of best countries to live in. Go figure.) Please, explain to me how Socialism is a terrible, broken philosophy. This is further elaborated in the site - http://answers.yahoo.com...
6.Examples of the success of welfare provisions established with a socialist outlook –
•Britain's National Health Service (NHS) – The National Health Service offers care to all residents of the United Kingdom. The aim of the health service is to ensure that anyone can receive the medical care they need, regardless of their age, circumstances or financial situation. The NHS offers many advantages to UK residents, especially in terms of the cost, the care available and the continuous quality reviews. Elaborated at the site - http://www.monetos.co.uk...
•According to the CIA World Factbook, nine European countries place ahead of the United States in terms of per capita Gross Domestic Product — Luxembourg, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Netherlands — all socialist countries. The United Kingdom, Austria, Canada, Australia, France, and Germany come up close on the heels of the United States.1 Considering the fact that these countries generally have less natural resources than the United States, and they offer extensive government services — free medical care, public transportation for the poor, generous unemployment income, and retirement benefits — hence proving that socialist systems of government are truly better than capitalistic systems.
•Several Socialist organizations are thriving , this is elaborated at - http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com...
"Socialism promotes the formation of a classless society in which equal opportunities are provided to all, this also helps in maximising the potential of each individual, and this view is shared by technocratic socialists. EQUALITY OF OUTCOME:"
This is why capitalism is better. Brain drain. When everyone gets treated/paid = then smart people leave to capialist countries becasue their work will yeild success, and the dumber people will enter the country because sociaism ewards te poor and the lazy, not the smart and the hard working. Also you have proved no benifit to your case.
"The wealth of the earth belongs to all men or none. Capitalism advocates the concentration of wealth, resources and power in the hands of few people."
This is used against capitalism all the time, and no it doesn't advocate that at all. It advocates if you work then you get rich. If you don't you become/stay poor. Also what benifit is there to having all having the same money? explain this. Also Karl marx: "to each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Well he naver answrs one question: Who gets the money? And why? Why do they deserve it? So soialism has unanswered questions that lead to uncertianty.
"The values of kindness, honesty and goodwill for all, are what set humans physiologically apart from animals, these values are showcased throughout the system of socialism."
This is an economic type debate. Why do we want this! Econmically those points are a failure, lets look at history:
Vietnam-failed when the USSR did
North Korea-people sarving in the streets, their economy is less than missisipis. Failed
CHina- when they where socialist they failed. Now they reformed the system allowing enterpenurship. So they saved themselves through capitalist reforms.
etc. History repeats itself, socialism sucks.
"Capitalism causes the degradation of artisans and craftsmen, to routine machine-like work. Capitalism has absolutely no space for the natural or acquired talent of people."
Actally its the opposite. In capitalism you get rewarded through hard work and talent. In socialism you get neither. You get paid as much as the guy next to you, so it creaes laziness because you will still get that pay check. So capitalism actually has moreroom for that then socialism.
"In a socialist system, society is ruled and controlled by the people"
Really? So why did in Nazi Germany (yes economic socialists) give no freedom. Ho about east germany? USSR? Cuba? Canada is taking them away slowly? Vietnam? Capitalism is FREEDOM OF CHOICE! in soialistic societys the goverment owns you, your supplies, and eerything you know. What they say goes. Also capitilism is parially run by money, as that is why it succeds. Benifits, and incentives are capitilist. Would you rather make things and make more money, or make things and receive the same amount of small wages your dumb neighbor gets. In economy incentives make you go round and round. In socialistic countries you have No freedom of choice, or incentives. Your argument is a fallacy.
"Socialism has provisions and rights for the welfare of people, like the right to work, the right to education, the right to free health care at the point of use etc"
Well ecoomically it doesn't work. And free health care isn't free, it involves huga amounts of taxes. The right to work doesn't economically hold up because the employer won't have enough money to pay the employees, especially if he gets paid as much as them. Right to education is in this country to. public schools, the goverment makes you goto school, homeshool, public, private. So in a capitalist society you get that benifit. And for those of you who like that healthcare then obamacare will give it to you, in a capitalist society. This argument too is a fallacy.
"Capitalist monopolies lead to certain individuals earning obscene amounts of profits, by selling products and services at exorbitant prices."
False, monompiles have never occured for long periods of time in our country. They are short lived. In a socilist company the goverment is the monopoly, and they will do what u said above, raise prices. So do you want goverment beurocrats or yourself dealing with economic needs? I choose self. So should you.
"Socialist economies are well planned and focus more on human happiness and unity rather than the glorification or gratification of a relatively small group of the population of a nation."
COrrect nice over economy. Fail of an argument because profit = money, oney = good economy. Happiness = great. but = well how about the economy? Sure the poor are happy, but our economy is in the tube look at greece.
"America is a capitalist nation and is now in a great debt crisis"
Actually so is greece. And their sami-socialist economically. It is not an economic system that does this, its the goverment. Socialism calls for more spending, capialism doesn't. Obama has tried kesyian and socialist economics. It has failed. And increased the debt. Also at least we arent like greece, riots. Italy-brink of riots.
$304.87 Billion US dollars at current prices - 2010Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators
their debt: 341, 424, 616, 718 and rising, in euros too. The number above is in US dollars, lets multipy it by divide teir debt
their debt in $: almost the size of their economy.
Also their inflation is higher then ours, yes a socialist country is worse off.
"China, a socialist nation, owns the largest amount of foreign debt in The United States Of America"
So? They are a 3rd world nation (they pee on the streets...ew) and also the only reason their economy is rowing is because they have had capitalist reforms allowing enterpenureship, after those reforms they econom boomed. So a few capitalist reforms saved them.
"The United States Of America also showcase a large number of bank failures with their capitalist economy."
GOOD! the banks choose and did dumb things, their problem. May unds cruel, but when the economy was truly capitalist like 1900 and before) the banks rerely defaulted. And guess what, 2 goverment agecies and 2 no 3 people caused this.
Freddi mae, freddi mac. Their regulations fored the housing bubble and forced the banks to intervene. Goverment forcing a decline, socialist goverments do this all of the time.
Barney frank: his commitie passed other regulations on the housing and banks to, again, the goverments fault
Bill Clinton: Did what barney frank did
George W. Bush: Failed to react by killing the laws and regulations.
So the goverment made the problem, and guess what, socialist countries control the economy and make the same mistakes.
"So much for a capitalist economy being efficient!"
Then tell me why even in the case of this madness our economy is still the best? No govrment agancy is efficient, so under socialim it slows things down.
"The Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway, etc.) are consistently rated the best places to live"
It's cause those countries are small. Socialism works well in small countries, but in countries bigger than those then it fails. You forgot switzerland, the most capitalist country.
"ensure that anyone can receive the medical care they need"
my dad (doctor) says that their healthcare system is terrible.
Actully the only socialist countries are here: http://en.wikipedia.org...
"Several Socialist organizations are thriving"
the countries in that wikipedia suck.
I am out of room, this article explains the arguments I would have made i I have room:
rhea97 forfeited this round.
Frankly, it is socialist economics, though you can try to paper over that fact all that you want.
When a government intervenes in a market, it upsets the dynamics of a market and forces inefficiencies. In fact, I would strongly argue that government is responsible for the high health care costs today. 
(health care industry is a good example)
As soon as you get government involved, there are mandates of what plans have to include, it increases prices and consolidates supply. That is bad for the consumers of health care. 
Same applies to other industries
Not only that, but the government would require taxes to fund such programs. Lets think about that word. It has two meanings which are very closely related. On one hand, it means a government forcibly taking money from an entity. At the same time, it means to place an undue burden on an activity which ultimately limits it. In fact, taxation reduces your economic freedom, placing an undue burden on your ability to prosper while a parasitic government leeches from you. Time and time again has shown that a reduction in tax rates will stimulate the economy and a production of more revenue. 
So socialism raises taxes, ruins industry, and forces you to buy products.
The solution for the 21st century isn't more government interference in your life and less freedom, it is less government interference and more freedom. 
Socialism is bad because it is condescending, inefficient, and immoral.
Although it sounds appealing on paper, it just doesn't work in practice. for one big reason, brain drain.
In a socialist society smart people won't get rewarded for their efforts, they get the same pay as the cashier. So they move to places where they can get more money, so the smart people leave. Dumb people go to the socialist areas because they earn more there then they can in America. So in socialist states, smart people leave, dumb people enter. Hence, brain drain.
Socialism is bad because it is condescending. Socialism takes away the liberty to decide how you wish to spend your money.
Socialism is inefficient because it makes economic calculation impossible. Although you can predict it well, how it's gonna end up in 30 years is harder to do.
Socialism is immoral because it takes the smart people's success and gives it to the poor, which sounds great, but this causes brain drain. As stated above.
Now this is a lets compare DP wealth per capita
USA = 46,860
China = 7,544
Uk (economically capatilist, not socialy) = 35,059
laos = 2,449
Source: international monetary fund (in US $)
So in capitalist countries you make more money, socialism = less money.
Its sad, socialism was the most common system historically, sadly it doesn't work. The USSR, 3rd world country other than their military, then collapsed. Vietnam, socialistic, collapsed into semi-socialism, still struggling. China, where struggling, passed CAPITALIST reform allowing entrepreneurship. Without that capitalist reform they would still be struggling, socialism failed there, they fixed it with a little capitalism. Greece, semi socialist, look what's happening to them. Look at history, history repeats itself. And if that's true then socialism always fails.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" –Karl Marx
"…I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." –Barack Hussein Obama to Joe the Plumber
Both quotes call for the redistribution of wealth. Both quotes talk about who needs to give the wealth and who needs to get it. However, neither quote addresses the most important questions: Who gets the wealth ? Why do they deserve it ? 
So tell me: Why does Subject A have to pay for B, C, or D's crap ? Why does A owe B,C, or D anything ? 
So hard working person a, rich, should he give his money to B or C, or even welfare D? if he chooses to, but under socialism it is forced. Capitalism lets you choose, socialism just forces you. Also either way, why do they deserve A's money?
There are no answers to any of the questions that socialism brings up. Yes, we must love our neighbor as the Bible commands, but "love thy neighbor" does not mean "support thy neigbor while he sips a margarita on a hammock while you work yourself into an early grave." Ethically, as a society, we have a responsibility to care for those who TRULY can not care for themselves, (wounded veterans, children, the very elderly, the infirm, etc.) but we have no responsibility to those who refuse to do so, like Subjects B, C, D. That's why socialism sucks. It can't answer the most basic of questions: Why
Well I have proven that socialism is bad. Time for capitalism:
The Glass-Steagall Act was created in 1933 in response to the Great Depression and gets its name from the two main sponsors of the legislation. Senator Carter Glass, a former Treasury secretary and the founder of the Federal Reserve System, and Henry Steagall, a House of Representatives member and chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, drafted and pushed to have this legislation passed. It created a separation of commercial banking and investment banking, by not allowing financial institutions to do both. Once enacted financial institutions had a year to decide if they were going to be one or the other. In the fallout of the Great Depression it was determined by many that large commercial banks became too greedy and speculative, and this act sought to tightly curb and control the activity of banks and investments by separating them, only allowing 10% of a commercial bank's revenue to come from securities. Many in the financial industry saw this as too harsh a judgment, and Glass himself sought to repeal the act shortly after it's passage claiming it was an overreaction to the crisis. 
Good example why governments should get out of business.
Overall, capitalism is good. The wealth and relative high standard of living we all enjoy in this nation is evidence of that. There is nothing wrong with big business, big money, and big banks. They have enabled our country to prevail in times of war and threat. Pure grit and determination alone didn't enable us to simultaneously defeat the Nazis and the Japanese in World War II. Both were very savvy, with well planed tactics and engineering. The simple truth is we out spent them, and out produced them. We cranked ships out faster than the German U boats could sink them. After Pearl Harbor we rebuilt and rearmed our Pacific fleet in record time. Technology that was outdated for us at the beginning of the War quickly became state of the art, far surpassing the abilities of our enemies'. We had a ton of production capability with a big checkbook to throw at the effort.
In the 1980s it was capitalism that defeated the Soviet Union. Yes Ronald Reagan had a high budget for defense, but it was still a fraction of our budget and very manageable. However, the Soviet Union had to spend a ridiculous percentage of it's GNP in an attempt to just keep pace. They couldn't do it because they weren't capitalists. It broke them down, forcing a collapse. Their population started demanding certain things from their government, and became more and more discontent with their standard of living. How is that for a war? Not a single shot fired! Zero troops mobilized! All capitalism and big money. Don't mess with a good thing. Money keeps a nation strong, people fed, and a military at the ready. 
Let's look at history here:
1. Help lead to the industrial revolution, a huge economic growth time. Production increased end unemployment hit almost zero.
2. Heavy mental was created by capitalism due to the industrial age and other research projects that wouldn't have happened under socialism.
3. America is the richest country in the world
4. Capitalism creates freedom
5. Created ou rights
6. you should thank capitalism for everything you have earned. History repeats itself, then stick with this system, and all of these will multiply.
The prevailing interest among humans in this world is self-interest. Anti-capitalists call it greed. Religion calls it sin. Science calls it survival. In fact, few philosophies refer to self interest in itself as something good, but it is inescapable. You cannot educate people out of self-interest. It is the natural order of human behavior and the only way to tame this beast is to work with it. Dr. Walter E. Williams describes how capitalism works with self-interest: 
"Capitalism is relatively new in human history. Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man." 2
Don't take this as an argument that capitalism is perfect or produces perfect results. Far from it. However, capitalism is the closest thing to a perfect economic system we will ever see on this earth. 
Capitalism is the only economic system in the world that promotes voluntary excellence in individuals. Individuals are rewarded based on the amount of value they provide to the market. Capitalism provides incentives to be great and invent things that were never thought possible. It is a system that promotes growth among individuals and society as a whole. 
Some people call this greed, yes IT IS, I WILL NOT DENY. But, what do humans want most? Money. Capitalism gives them that incentive, socialism doesn't. Without incentive, nothing will work as well. Money=work hard make things. No money=lazy. So socialism promotes lazyness because the people see that there is no benifit. Capitalism says "hey we have incentives" and the people say "If we work we get money! Yay lets work".
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interests." -Adam Smith
So economically socialism sucks, capitalism rocks. Also if you look above which one sounds better? Support capitalism, support the economy, support money, support freedom. Socialism isn't good in practice, only on paper. Capitalism is good on both. This concludes.
rhea97 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by THEBOMB 5 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||7||0|
Reasons for voting decision: First of all, Socialism never has worked in the past no empirical evidence. and also there's the FF.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.