The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
spiritmeetthesoul
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

overall, more capitalism, more focus on free market, will make things worse for economy

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: 6/12/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 453 times Debate No: 56488
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

my opening argument will be mostly borrowed from a recent article:

US Set to Become the Newest Third World Country
http://iacknowledge.net...
"The United States, the home of Capitalism, is about to demonstrate its ultimate failure, as the cannibalistic economic system consumes the nation"s economy from within.

The US economy is rigged toward the 1% of wealthiest citizens and corporations, this radically skews outcomes to the detriment of the economy as a whole.

As CJ Werlhman writes over at Alternet:
"America has the most billionaires in the world, but not a single U.S. city ranks among the world"s most livable cities. Not a single U.S. airport is among the top 100 airports in the world. Our bridges, roads and rails are falling apart, and our middle class is being gutted out thanks to three decades of stagnant wages, while the top 1 percent enjoys 95 percent of all economic gains."

US income inequality is at its greatest for nearly a century and is rising, as the income gap between the bottom 90% and top 1% of Americans reaches its largest since 1928. When compared globally, the US is the second most economically unequal society (behind Chile). But what does economic inequality mean for average Americans?"

if we let things go as they will, the rich will only get richer. instead of the 1% owning say 30% of everything, it will become more and more of everything,. that will stifle economic stimulus, cause wealth will be immobilized in the hands of fewer than would be ideal.
spiritmeetthesoul

Con

I think your argument begins with:

if we let things go as they will, the rich will only get richer. instead of the 1% owning say 30% of everything, it will become more and more of everything,. that will stifle economic stimulus, cause wealth will be immobilized in the hands of fewer than would be ideal.

Firstly, you say: if we let things go as they will...This is a meaningless statement. Who is we? Where does "go as they will mean?"

Next, you say: instead of the 1% owning say 30% of everything, it will become more and more of everything,...what is everything, who is the 1%, what is your proof that this group will "become more and more of everything?" Where are you getting your 30% from? Why not say 100000%? You are not being precise enough for me to be able to counter your argument.

that will stifle economic stimulus, cause wealth will be immobilized in the hands of fewer than would be ideal. ...OMG. Let me help you with that.

Stifle economic stimulus? that's quit a mouthful.

I think what you're saying is that the wealthy attract higher rates of returns on their investments and risk increasing the income gap and taking more of the wealth. This I assume you mean to say is a bad thing.

Ok, to begin, you are assuming the US is a capitalistic society. While it may once have been, it most defog is not day. The US government manages the economy with various tools in tandem with the federal reserve. A managed economy by definition cannot be capitalist.

Next, you're assuming that more capitalism will make things worse, but you have not clearly stated for whom? If the rich keep getting richer under the current system, then "capitalism" works great for them.

While I'm not saying you're wrong, I am saying your haven't clearly defined your position and have presented a remarkably poor argument.

Give it another try why don't ya?
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

con argues we are not truly a capitalistic country. we are a lot more than by far most other developed countries, are we not? and con doesn't explain how it would be *better* if we were more capitalistic. ive established that our country's inequality is one of the worst in the world. increasing capitalism would only cause that to become worse, would it not?

con seems to act as if it's not a bad thing that the rich would just get richer? maybe he's just asking rhetorically so i define my argument better? but i did in the opening statement state that inequality is a bad thing and that more capitalism would make it worse.

and woujldnt it be better if there was more money in the hands of people lower on the economic scale? that would cause stimulus to the economy. if the rich get richer, it will detract money from those who would be most useful with it. we are driven by a demand economy, not supply. the rich have plenty of money, if there's need for an innovation or somehow to make a buck, there's plenty of people and money to do it. it's not like they need a hand.

remember, im not arguing that we shouldnt have any capitalism, just that we shouldnt focus too much more on it than we already are. it's a good system at keeping prices attainable for people. and, we probably have some of the best innovations and productivity in the country.
spiritmeetthesoul

Con

spiritmeetthesoul forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

reiterate
spiritmeetthesoul

Con

spiritmeetthesoul forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by spiritmeetthesoul 2 years ago
spiritmeetthesoul
There is a typo in the 8th paragraph: It reads "Ok, to begin, you are assuming the US is a capitalistic society. While it may once have been, it most defog is not day. "

Please replace defog with definitely
Posted by spiritmeetthesoul 2 years ago
spiritmeetthesoul
What specifically is your argument?
No votes have been placed for this debate.