The Instigator
HandsOff
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points
The Contender
Gear
Con (against)
Losing
9 Points

Liberalism is smarter, more efficient and more unfair than 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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/27/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 732 times Debate No: 3405
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (10)

 

HandsOff

Pro

Under a classic socialist government, citizens provide the man power while the government owns and maintains the land, factories, office buildings, equipment and businesses required to generate economic production. Yes, a socialist government does what it wants with the profits resulting from such production, but it also assumes all the risks, costs, burdens and responsibilities of business ownership.

Liberalism, on the other hand, advocates a far more efficient (albeit more unfair) way to make money for government consumption. More simply, liberalism advocates taking whatever percentage of profit it sees fit from individuals and businesses while leaving all the headaches of business ownership to them. Unlike individuals and businesses under socialism, those ruled by liberalism would be responsible for acquiring, managing and maintaining their own capital, factories, employees, equipment, and office buildings.

It is fascinating to me that liberalism has managed to come up with a way to receive all the benefits of business ownership with none of the burdens, risk or responsibility. If a business venture fails under liberalism, it has cost the government nothing because government had nothing invested. Yet if a business succeeds, the government is there with its hand out (and a gun in the other) to take its "fair share." Is it unfair to make a profit without enduring the cost, risk and effort required to do so? I'd say no. But isn't it smart in comparison to what those silly socialists had in mind?
Gear

Con

Gear forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
HandsOff

Pro

Okay, well I'll try to repost this later. 100 characters sure seems like a lot of work at this point. If anyone wants to take this debate, let me know in the comment section and I can challenge you directly. Thank you.
Gear

Con

Gear forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
HandsOff

Pro

Okay, well I'll try to repost this later. 100 characters sure seems like a lot of work at this point. If anyone wants to take this debate, let me know in the comment section and I can challenge you directly. Thank you.
Gear

Con

Gear forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
Oolon,
Well said-- all of it.
Posted by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
Handsoff, in the end you have no legal leg to stand on in stopping the people voting for social services. So vote yourself, get the word out, fight the good fight. Don't assume the law will conform to your view of injustice, the same advice I would give to a socialist.

As Churchill said,
"Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Posted by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
See, this is what I'm talking about. This is the debate you should be posting instead of "Liberalism is more efficient than Socialism". Cut down to the real heart of the issue.

I don't think that anything the people decide is automatically fair. It is 'just' if we define justice legally. Of course you assume that taxes are taken only from the wealthy, and not everyone. You also assume that no wealthy program ever votes for progressive taxes or social programs.

The question becomes, fair or just to whom? You find socialism unfair, your neighbor may find capitalism unfair. We have limits in the constitution, but they don't provide guidance on social services.

I don't use minarchism or populism as a rubric, myself. Another conflict over what should be done with public money. I see whether this program will benefit everyone and if it will do so without encouraging abuse. Welfare, despite it's noble intent, is creating poverty. Publicly funded, not necessarily publicly ran, primary education is not enforcing laziness and helps everyone. Unemployment insurance is a short term stop gap to help people return to the job market. Programs that help the population without disincentives to work.

There is much that charity could take over and that leads to abuse from both the government and people. However I don't think of government as an ultimate evil, but a dangerous tool. Obviously you will not agree with me and I will not agree with you. Mm neighbor may think us both fools and his neighbor think we all three have our head's on wrong. In the end it is public money and is up to the public to use for good or ill. What stops the possible march to socialism? People like me and you drawing a line, even if we don't all draw it at the same point.

Is this perfect? Is my system free of flaws? Is yours? Of course not, utopia is an impossibility.
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
Oolon,
You know my stance on fair taxation-- the minimum needed to take care of the minimum required, regardless of what it amounts to. Any tax beyond that is unfair in my eyes. But necessary taxation(for only services that are absolutely necessary) is not unjust nor unfair. The unfairness occurs when the majority continues to change its idea of what is "necessary" with each generation. Do you suppose this definition of necessary will ever stop growing? Do you any reason why the majority won't want the minority (the wealthy) to pay for their food, clothing, housing, healthcare, college, transportation, etc.? You will be the firt to say that whatever tax the majority decides to impose is by definition "fair," because you somehow think the wealthy imposed this tax willingly on themselves. So is there anything to stop them?
Posted by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
Are you saying that all taxes on business of persons in business are unjust? If so, then that goes beyond criticizing liberalism. Wouldn't a better opening argument be that liberalism (modern liberalism) wants to concentrate government money and power into a bureaucracy? This would help underline your point that the government takes a whatever percentage it wants, instead of whatever percentage the people decide on. Just saying that liberalism leaves others to business and then taxes them doesn't highlight unfairness.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
HandsOffGearTied
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 
Vote Placed by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
HandsOffGearTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
HandsOffGearTied
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 
Vote Placed by Battlecry 8 years ago
Battlecry
HandsOffGearTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by liber-t 8 years ago
liber-t
HandsOffGearTied
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 
Vote Placed by Araku 8 years ago
Araku
HandsOffGearTied
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 
Vote Placed by Handout 8 years ago
Handout
HandsOffGearTied
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 
Vote Placed by liberalconservative 8 years ago
liberalconservative
HandsOffGearTied
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 
Vote Placed by Chadkenichi 8 years ago
Chadkenichi
HandsOffGearTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by HadenQuinlan 8 years ago
HadenQuinlan
HandsOffGearTied
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