The Instigator
cookie1
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
MaesterAemon
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Free Market Capitalism vs Socialism

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: 9/14/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 590 times Debate No: 61696
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

cookie1

Pro

I am on the capitalist side, first round is for acceptance.
Free Market Capitalism - Free-market capitalism refers to an economic system where prices for goods and services are set freely by the forces of supply and demand and are allowed to reach their point of equilibrium without intervention by government policy.
Socialism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
MaesterAemon

Con

I accept. I would like to raise the point that there are several varieties of socialism and there is no single definition that encapsulating all but your definition is fair enough.
Debate Round No. 1
cookie1

Pro

cookie1 forfeited this round.
MaesterAemon

Con

The gap between poor and rich countries has never been as great as it is today, Warren Buffet's had an estimated net worth of $62 billion in 2008 (1), this while one in seven people on earth goes to bed hungry every night and 6.5 million children die of starvation and malnutrition every year ( 2). This absurd inequality between wages is because of capitalism, since the capitalist's only aim is to generate profit there is no reason to keep anything other than a minimum wage for the workers. In a globalized world, devloped countries can outsource industries to developing countries where workers will not expect a high wage. The lower the wages the capitalist can pay to the laborers, the more profit can be generated. The capitalist does not care whether his laborers' living standards are good, acceptable or bad ( he does want to maintain a level where the laborers will not die or rebel), as long as they deliver the work for the lowest wage (3). Therefore the capitalist can gain an absurd amount of money since he reaps all the profit appropriated from all his laborers while the workers lowest in the hierarchy earns hardly enough to survive. The ordinary worker does not have a free choice whether he wants to work or not since he is at such an inferior bargaining position that he has to accept the capitalist's offer for survival.
Such inequality is appalling , it can by no means be justifiable that an ordinary laborer who works equally as hard, or harder than a CEO should struggle for his survival while the CEO lives in ludicrous luxury. In socialism, production and wages are directed to human needs, there is consequently no need to maximize profit and thus gross inequality wouldn't exist. (4)

Capitalism always acts on the cost of nature and its ecological balance in it's never ending hunt for new markets . With its imperative to constantly expand profitability, it exposes ecosystems to destabilizing pollutants, fragments habitats that have evolved over time to allow the flourishing of organisms, squanders resources, and reduces nature to the exchangeability required for the accumulation of capital. Socialism requires self-determination, community, and a meaningful existence. Capital reduces the majority of the world's people to a mere reservoir of labor power while discarding much of the remainder as useless. The present capitalist system cannot regulate, much less overcome, the crises it has set into motion. It cannot solve the ecological crisis because to do so requires setting limits upon accumulation of capital

A truly "free market" , would destroy our species as well as the environment. It's well known among economist that markets are inefficient say I am buying a car from you we only think about whats good for us the harms the car produces are considered an externality. The market actually limits choice, lets say I wanna get home at night from work, the market offers a choice I can have a Ford or Volkswagen etc. it does not offer me the subway system, what I want, whats good for me,whats good for the environment and whats good for my (possible) future children markets only offer individual consumption. Markets are supposed to be informed consumers acting rationally the P.R industry's job is to undermine markets to make uninformed consumers and the corporations keep the useful bits of market theory for profits.

1 The World?s Billionaires: #1 Warren Buffett. (2008, March). Forbes.

2 Hunger. (2011). World Food Programme. Retrieved June 7, 2011

3 Engels, Frederick. (2005). The principles of Communism. Marxist Internet Archive. Retrieved June 7, 2011

4 Marx, K. (n.d.). Critique of the Gotha Programme: I. Marxist Internet Archive.
Debate Round No. 2
cookie1

Pro

Firstly I will argue that capitalism is more fair than socialism. Obviously socialism largely encourages equal distribution of wealth, I dont mean communism, which is extreme socialism, but i mean as you proved by complaining about the unequal distribution of wealth. The way socialists see the problem is all wrong though, they seek change through stealing from the rich and giving to the poor in the form of taxes. Its funny how people say that socialism is the fairer system when it is the system that steals peoples hard earned money and then redistributes it through the taxation system. In a free market system (Laissez-Faire Capitalism) fairness will be the foundation of society, you pay for what you use. Is it fair that my money should be taken to pay for other peoples healthcare when I can hardly put food on the table. Am I obliged to provide for people I don't know? I don't think so. In conclusion I would argue that capitalism is fairer because it allows people that earn their money to spend it as they see fit, and socialism would steal from this man to provide for other people.

Now I will argue that capitalism is more efficient and innovative. In a socialist system why would anyone feel the need to be innovative and to create new ideas if they are already getting a steady income and its being shared between the workers equally and no one is trying to earn a profit. In capitalism innovation is key to surviving in the free market, several companies trying to get the most profit by making new and better products, e.g. apple's iphone changed the phone business and thus
they were rewarded with lots of sales and profit and this improved the wages of the people working at apple.
mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-21/apple-retail-store-workers-said-to-receive-wage-increases.html

Rebuttals-
"this while one in seven people on earth goes to bed hungry every night and 6.5 million children die of starvation and malnutrition every year"
And your answer to this is socialism, the answer to this is not theft, the answer is humanitarian aid, also most of these people dying are from African countries not western ones. This is not to say that these stats aren't awful but this didn't happen because of capitalism it happened mostly because Africas farmland is appaling resulting in an economy that basically can't grow.

"it can by no means be justifiable that an ordinary laborer who works equally as hard, or harder than a CEO should struggle for his survival while the CEO lives in ludicrous luxury"
The difference between a CEO and a worker I a CEO has worked their way up thus earning more money as a reward for their previous hard work.

"Warren Buffet's had an estimated net worth of $62 billion in 2008"
wichitaliberty.org/regulation/regulation-helps-big-business-not-free-enterprise/

"it does not offer me the subway system, what I want, whats good for me,whats good for the environment"
Do you know how economics works? Basic supply and demand, if there are people that want a subway system, a company will make a subway system, if there is demand for an environmentally friendly car there will be a company that supplies an environmentally friendly car.
Also quoting Karl Marx doesn't work in you favour.
www.conservativehome.com/the-deep-end/2013/11/marxism-not-only-evil-in-practice-but-evil-in-theory-too.html
www.strike-the-root.com/karl-marx-most-evil-man-to-ever-live
Also are you a communist because lots of your sources are from communist sites?
MaesterAemon

Con

MaesterAemon forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
cookie1

Pro

cookie1 forfeited this round.
MaesterAemon

Con

Well I guess we messed this debate up eh? sorry about my forfeit i really wanted to have a meaningful debate but I had to write a paper.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by MaesterAemon 2 years ago
MaesterAemon
sorry I couldn't get on the site
Posted by cookie1 2 years ago
cookie1
Sorry I forfeited, ive been super busy, it wont happen again
No votes have been placed for this debate.