The Instigator
Wrappers
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
FuzzyCatPotato
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Socialism is better for communities than Capitalism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
FuzzyCatPotato
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/11/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,238 times Debate No: 63077
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (24)
Votes (2)

 

Wrappers

Pro

Socialistic countries are the happiest and have the highest quality of living.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

DEFINITIONS

To debate, we must define socialism and capitalism.

Because Pro has failed to provide any definitions, I provide two here:

Socialism is "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," [1].

Capitalism is "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state," [2].

CONTENTIONS

Pro makes two unproven statements.

CONTENTION 1

First, Pro argues that citizens of socialistic countries are happier than in capitalistic countries.

Pro provides no evidence for this claim. This is sufficient to negate said claim.

However, there's contradicting evidence that citizens under socialism have been very unhappy. Consider the Iron Curtain [3], a wall designed not to protect citizens from external threats, but to keep them from leaving. Why would the USSR, one of the largest (and most "successful") experiments in socialism, need to keep its citizens in, if they were happy?

CONTENTION 2

Second, Pro argues that citizens of socialistic countries are better off materially than in capitalistic countries.

Pro provides no evidence for this claim. This is sufficient to negate said claim.

However, there's contradicting evidence that socialism is a far less efficient mechanism of producing goods. I quote from [4], "The more moderate arguments of Hayek and von Mises have been supported by the historical evidence. When they argued that socialist production was doomed to be more inefficient than capitalist production, they were surely right. And when they argued that the market and state ownership, as general characteristics of a whole national economy, were incompatible, they were on to something. .... China, since the late 1970s, had developed a strange duial economy, in which a de facto capitalist, market economy coexists with a planned, state-owned economy - and growth comes mainly from the former. .... People's lives in the Soviet Union were characterised by a secure, humdrum poverty. There was a general regime of job security - that is, of security of tenure in existing jobs - aw well as a very low level of unemployment. This job security was the product of labour hoarding in a shortage economy, by enterprises whose managers had nothing to gain from reducing their payrolls. This was inefficient, but comfortable. ... Money incomes were less inequal than in the West, but the dispersion of money incomes understated material inequality. The latter rested on access to often unobtainable items in a shortage economy. 'To each according to his official rank' was the principle[.] .... Maddison's figures of per capita GDP show the Soviet Union never coming close to 'catching up and overtaking' the US."

Socialist economies are inefficient. Even if unemployment and real poverty are low, the system is rampant with actual poverty, corruption, and shortage.

VOTE CON

Vote Con, because Pro has provided no reasons to vote Pro, and Con has provided two reasons to vote Con.

REFERENCES

[1] https://www.google.com...
[2] https://www.google.com...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] http://phobos.ramapo.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
Wrappers

Pro

Wrappers forfeited this round.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro has forfeited the previous round.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
Wrappers

Pro

Wrappers forfeited this round.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Pro has forfeited the previous round.

Vote Con.

---

REASONS TO VOTE CON

Conduct: Pro has forfeited all forfeitable rounds.

Grammar: Pro capitalized "Capitalism" in the title, when unnecessary.

Arguments: Pro has no arguments. Con has two unrebutted reasons to negate.

Sources: Pro has no sources. Con has 4.

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
And yet it is the conservatives that give 4 times to charities OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS than do liberals.

Last winter I saw a phenomenon. I actually saw a democrat with his hands in his own pockets.

No democrat gives out of other peoples pocket because of caring for anything but getting votes.

If you liberals are so generous, then let the government set up a special volunteer fund to pay for all that " charity."After all, government never mishandles money.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
"fuzzyness.......Then why is it always the democrats that push welfare, and the republicans who try to limit it?I will answer that for you. Because the democrats are the , entitled to other peoples money , party."

Because Democrats care about helping the disadvantaged. Republicans don't.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
fuzzyness.......Then why is it always the democrats that push welfare, and the republicans who try to limit it?I will answer that for you. Because the democrats are the , entitled to other peoples money , party.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
"fuzzy.... Good name . Just about says it all about your knowledge of life."

Please look up "ad hominem".

"At least 47% of Americans receive food stamps. How many receive medicare, Medicaid, welfare, housing, obamaphones, extended workman's comp.,utilities, childcare, and the list goes on."

Actually, that statistic has been extensively disproven. For example, see: http://www.politifact.com...

"The places with highest welfare are always run by democrats.That is usually inner cities. Of course, freeloading is like a disease, it spreads when it comes in contact with people."

Again. Republican states have more welfare. http://ivn.us...
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
fuzzy.... Good name . Just about says it all about your knowledge of life.

At least 47% of Americans receive food stamps. How many receive medicare, Medicaid, welfare, housing, obamaphones, extended workman's comp.,utilities, childcare, and the list goes on.

The places with highest welfare are always run by democrats.That is usually inner cities. Of course, freeloading is like a disease, it spreads when it comes in contact with people.

Look at Detroit. At one time Motown was the jewel of America.60 years of democrat control and it is a wasteland. Self -reliant people tend towards republican.Freeloaders vote democrat. It is the party of entitled to other peoples money.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Socialism and communism are very different. Socialism is government control. Communism is worker control. One is possible and terrible, the other a pipe dream.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Socialism is communism.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Socialism is better for COMMUNISTS, that title would be undebateable.
Posted by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
"fuzzy......Over half of Americans are now freeloading off government"

Prove it.

"Capital being syphoned off to those who did nothing to earn it but to vote in democrats."

Actually, states with higher use of welfare programs tend to vote Republican.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
fuzzy......Over half of Americans are now freeloading off government, or other peoples money.How is that rare?That is the only thing that will bring down a capital economy. Capital being syphoned off to those who did nothing to earn it but to vote in democrats.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
WrappersFuzzyCatPotatoTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Hanspete 2 years ago
Hanspete
WrappersFuzzyCatPotatoTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro posted nothing except his first round acceptance.