The Instigator
MichealBeans
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
bballcrook21
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Land ownership, property and farms(large land owners)

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 2 votes the winner is...
bballcrook21
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/3/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 482 times Debate No: 78348
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

MichealBeans

Con

Land inequality is power. Property controls where you live and how we get our food. Most people cannot grow their own food and rely on a system of competition(money) for survival. Land ownership makes freedom and equality impossible. Why should one man live in an apartment while another owns enough land to feed thousands? Farmers and giant farm corporations sells fuel(food) to the industry for money. The industry gives the worker a job to pay for food he 'cannot' grow, making him easily exploited and controlled. Everyone can grow their own food. Money is only necessary for wants, just like industry. Technology only helps to live, it is not essential. We all live from the earth. Those that do not live directly from the earth are controlled by means of survival.
bballcrook21

Pro

I have seen the rampant hypocrisy in your argument.

I will elaborate on my argument further on, but let me start off by stating that your argument is entirely referrable to Communism, which is a socio-economic ideology that prohibits the ownership of private property.

What you say, is that instead of a population forming around the successful, they should instead form around the unsuccessful. Instead of everyone having lots of land and wealth, everyone should lack wealth and land, as to create equality.

Communism sets to create synthetic equality by eliminating the need for more, which in turn creates inequality.

A Democratic Republic, or anything of the latter, sets to create equal opportunity, rather then equality altogether.

If you look at the human population, there is nothing but inequality. Different race, religion, gender, size, strength, intelligence, etc.

Instead of creating equality altogether, which you cannot do without a complete racially motivated genocide, you should create equal rights and equal freedoms.

By looking at your statement, you should give up your own home, your own computer, and your own belongings, because others lack some thereof. Do you now understand the hypocrisy in your statement?

"Most people cannot grow their own food" - this is untrue. Everyone, by definition, has the ability to grow food. They, however, lack the will to do so, because that service is provided for them by people who are entrusted to grow food, and then sell it at a price. This is called a profession, and that profession provides a type of service or a type of product, which in this case, is food. Without private property, which you seek to abolish, we get rid of all industry altogether. We get rid of competition, which gets rid of incentive. When we get rid of incentive, we state that harder or smarter work means you will gain the same amount as one who works poorly. You cannot support a nation in this way.

As Winston Churchill stated "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

Also, upon analyzing your statement once more, I come to see that you have denied your own claim. At the start you say "Most people cannot grow their own food", and then you begin to say "Everyone can grow their own food."

I await your response.
Debate Round No. 1
MichealBeans

Con

MichealBeans forfeited this round.
bballcrook21

Pro

Forfeiture. Just vote for me.
Debate Round No. 2
MichealBeans

Con

MichealBeans forfeited this round.
bballcrook21

Pro

Forfeiture.
Debate Round No. 3
MichealBeans

Con

MichealBeans forfeited this round.
bballcrook21

Pro

Forfeiture.
Debate Round No. 4
MichealBeans

Con

MichealBeans forfeited this round.
bballcrook21

Pro

Forfeiture.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by MichealBeans 2 years ago
MichealBeans
I forgot about this. My argument doesn't make much sense when everyone has their own views. Everyone physically can grow their own food but most city people wont be able to. So they sell hours of their lifes to pay for their food. Not everyone can be a farmer and how they get their food will control them and lead them into a life of economic competition. When just trying to get by in this world is too difficult to pay for its because we have forgoting to share.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
MichealBeansbballcrook21Tied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by PericIes 2 years ago
PericIes
MichealBeansbballcrook21Tied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gets conduct and arguments for Con's forfeiture.