The Instigator
dcarvajal1990
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
Brainmaster
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points

Deregulated Capitalism

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/9/2011 Category: Economics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,917 times Debate No: 16969
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (5)

 

dcarvajal1990

Con

A deregulated form of a capitalism such as the libertarian's conception of it is generally bad for society and increases the gap between the rich and the poor.
Brainmaster

Pro

And how is this bad?
Debate Round No. 1
dcarvajal1990

Con

A deregulated form of a capitalism such as the libertarian's conception of it is generally bad for society and increases the gap between the rich and the poor.

Well there are many things that are many adverse effects to certain areas of society:

1. No Laws for the Safety of Children or Mandatory Education Hours

In the Libertarian's conception of capitalism there is a lack of child labor laws. The lack of child labor laws directly effects the areas of education and the safety of the next generation of citizens. This form of capitalism in its ideal form would leave the amount of time that employee works and the amount of money that the employee earns completely up to the discretion of the employer. Since the employer has no basis for how he should treat his employees he could pay them 10 cents a day and make them work 16 hour days if he pleases so long as it is not affecting the amount of money their labor is outputting. Since the goal of capitalism is to make the most profit possible while inputting the least amount of capital, there is a rational basis for why this would be true in many cases. Working sixteen hour work days would be detrimental to a child's education especially since eventually they have to sleep and most likely going to school in between work and sleep would be an exercise in futility since they would not benefit. Without safety laws certain work environments (steel mills, coal mines, oil rigs, etc.) would be extremely dangerous for anyone and this would be tenfold for a child. Again I go back to my definition of capitalism in which the person who owns the business wants to get as much profit as possible while inputting the least amount of capital as possible. Safety precautions may turn out to be costly and a drain on the employers profit so the rational thing to do would be to not put in any resources into this endeavor. Furthermore since the employer has no sanctions to worry about he would be better off not looking out for the safety of his employees. The lack of such laws would be detrimental to our society because this would result in the death of a substantial amount of children and the ones that do survive would be uneducated and thus more likely to be manipulated into doing things that are not in their rational interests.

2. Deregulation would be detrimental to our democracy

Our democracy would suffer as a direct consequence of the lack of education of the masses because the masses would not know how civics or the political system would work. If most of the populace cannot make an informed decision about who our leaders should be then the privileged few will. This could easily convert a democracy into an aristocracy in which the political system would only benefit the rich. One could see how this would be violating the principles of democracy in which each rational agent votes on behalf of his own good.
Brainmaster

Pro

R1A. Best prepare the kid for work. He'll never know the difference later.

If education and work are perfectly merged, the child will have top physical and mental health. This leads to a better generation of people.

R1B. So what?

One can live on 80 cents a day if they work for it (raise crops, etc.) My opponent does not specify the society we work in! It can be a backwards society where this is still the norm.

R1C. Taxing the rich

If the rich are really rich, we can just tax them for public funds (welfare, improvement, etc.) Then we can feed the poor.

R1D. Even precautions cannot guarantee safety. Sh!t happens.

R2A. Free public schools, anyone?

R2B. The rich have a right to democracy as well. True democracy is equal to all non-government officials.







Regards, Brainmaster.


Debate Round No. 2
dcarvajal1990

Con

A. how do you merge work and school perfectly together if the majority of his waking life is spent doing labor? The person owning the capital does not have a vested interest in the child's safety much less his education. So my opponent still has not addressed the lack of a proper education of a child who would be working 16 hour days.

B. I believe I made it clear that the hypothetical situation I made up was that of a libertarian's conception of capitalism. Meaning that there is no government interference in private ownership which falls into the sphere of economics. This includes the price of labor and the prices charged for the goods produced from that labor. So if a person's labor is worth 10 cents for the goods produced yet the owner turns around and sells those same goods for 5 dollars without any price control than the consumer is at a large disadvantage especially if these goods happen to be essential for survival (food, clothes, shelter etc.) Since not everyone can be an owner of capital in a capitalist system we can assume that a large majority of people would fall into the category once again reaffirming this would not be good for the general population.

C. Once again I go back to the lack of education of the general populace. If the general populace is not educated enough then they will manipulated into doing irrational things such as... cutting taxes on the rich instead of feeding the poor. If the rich do not want to pay taxes and have the power and influence not to they will most likely keep voting to minimize the amount of taxes they pay while influencing a sheepish populace to vote their way. Again this effects equality directly and there would be a clear bias for the rich.

D. This argument is extremely fallacious and does not really make sense. It goes along the lines of this... the purpose of wearing a seatbelt is self defeating if my car gets crushed by an 18 wheeler thus a seatbelt is not important in any given situation or at any given time. However, we know this not to be true since wearing a seatbelt does indeed save lives especially in high impact crashes even though we have those occasional moments where sh!t happens. So just because we cannot prevent all accidents does not mean we should increase the likely hood of them by throwing away all safety regulations.

r2A. Again I go back to the uneducated masses. A rich person has no rational basis for paying stranger's public school. Reasons being that if they become educated they can 1. be competition for them in the free market system 2. start voting against the vested interest of the rich 3. compete with them for power and influence over government policies.

r2B. My opponent's second part of his second rebuttal is precisely why I do not advocate a deregulated capitalist system because in an ideal democratic system equality is the corner stone and without equal influence over government policy the interest of the poor will be crushed by the interest of the rich.
Debate Round No. 3
dcarvajal1990

Con

I take my opponent's argument or lack thereof as a concession to me. Thank you.
Brainmaster

Pro

I forfeit, I just chose to speed things up.
Debate Round No. 4
dcarvajal1990

Con

Vote for me!
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
Apparently Thaddeus and Sieben both beat me to it, but I'll also do this.
Posted by Thaddeus 6 years ago
Thaddeus
I'll debate you on the same resolution dcarvajal
Posted by dcarvajal1990 6 years ago
dcarvajal1990
that seems a little overconfident for someone who's arguments I've poked holes in
Posted by Brainmaster 6 years ago
Brainmaster
I am right you are wrong
Posted by petersaysstuff 6 years ago
petersaysstuff
If only you were pro I would debate this. I agree with you.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Willoweed 5 years ago
Willoweed
dcarvajal1990BrainmasterTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: pro forfetted
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
dcarvajal1990BrainmasterTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit by Pro and admitted defeat.
Vote Placed by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
dcarvajal1990BrainmasterTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeits.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
dcarvajal1990BrainmasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, 1 pt to Pro for making a small effort.
Vote Placed by darkkermit 6 years ago
darkkermit
dcarvajal1990BrainmasterTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO forfeited.