The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Capitalism is not a great system as is made out to be

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
AKMath has forfeited round #1.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/31/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 263 times Debate No: 117144
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




It is often argued that capitalism is a moral, Amazing system that creates wealth for everyone. It is my view that capitalism is none of what it's hyped up to be. I'll start off by countering common points made for it, And this can go from there.

1. Capitalism distributes resources efficiency

This common argument seems to not be based on imperial data, From what I can tell. Supermarkets waste / throw out around 15 billions worth of food, Or each year. In 2008 it was estimated at around 43 billion pounds of food. This all comes from a study from the NRDC, Which you can read in detail right here. (In-store food losses in the United States totaled an estimated 43 billion pounds in 2008, Equivalent to 10 percent of the total food supply at the retail level. 40 But that doesn"t tell the whole story. Through their influence both up and down the supply chain, Retailers actually are responsible, At least in part, For a much bigger proportion of total losses. Most of the loss in retail operations is in perishables"baked goods, Produce, Meat, Seafood, And, Increasingly, Ready-made foods. The USDA estimates that supermarkets lose $15 billion annually in unsold fruits and vegetables alone. Unfortunately, The retail model views waste as a part of doing business. According to a former President of Trader Joe"s, "the reality as a regional grocery manager is, If you see a store that has really low waste in its perishables, You are worried. If a store has low waste numbers it can be a sign that they aren"t fully in stock and that the customer experience is suffering. " Industry executives and managers view appropriate waste as a sign that a store is meeting quality control and full-shelf standards, Meaning that blemished items are removed and shelves are fully stocked. 41 In 2005 and 2006, Annual supermarket losses averaged 11. 4 percent for fresh fruit and 9. 7 percent for vegetables, With losses varying from 0. 6 percent for sweet corn to as high as 63 percent for mustard greens. ) (https://www. Nrdc. Org/sites/default/files/wasted-food-IP. Pdf)

So what's the relationship to capitalism in this example? In capitalism, Products are created to sell to consumers, Not made to be directly used by consumers. Any food that isn't sold within its expiration date must be thrown away, As it obviously can no longer be sold. This leads to waste and is a natural consequence of producing to sell rather than to immediately consume (Supply can't be equal to demand, Or at least is very unlikely, So waste is inevitable). All of this also applies to fast food and other types of restaurants.

Another example is housing. Around 500, 000-600, 000 people are homeless on a given night (https://endhomelessness. Org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report/). Meanwhile, There are around 18. 6 million empty homes (https://trofire. Com/2015/07/21/3-5-million-americans-are-homeless-18-6-million-homes-in-america-are-standing-empty-what-is-wrong-with-this-picture/). How can capitalism be said to allocate resources efficiently if there are more empty homes than homeless people? These houses aren't being built to be used, But rather to be sold.

This is just two examples, I will move on to the next argument now.

2. Capitalism results in the best products, At the cheapest price

Capitalists want to sell products and maximize profit, This allows for growth (which funny enough, Seemingly has no purpose but growth for the sake of growth-the market at work). The saying goes is that they will try and attract as many consumers as possible by selling the best product at the cheapest price. But does this claim hold water? Let"s analyze. In capitalist economies, Wealth inequality is produced and increases over time. This is a result of the increasing accumulation of capital, A natural aspect of capitalism. Workers are more replaceable, Workers who labour in "unskilled" industries (fast food for example), Are much lower paid than those of the latter, Those who labour in more "skilled industries", Those who are less replaceable. Despite the vastly different work, Those who labour for the same amount of time end up with differing amounts of buying power. There is obviously a large amount of unskilled industries with workers doing unskilled work. Due to their lower amount of buying power, There is a whole section of products produced that they can afford. These products, However, Are not of high quality. The demand of these products are the result of this low buying power. We have workers producing products that don"t last long, And are wasting labour and resources on these products.

There are good, Cheap products out now. How do some manage to release good quality products, While the products being cheap at the same time? The answer is cheap labour
Tech companies have overseas work done for very cheap, In China for example. Planned obsolescence is another glaring example of non-quality products. Produce products that are intended to stop working after a period of time.

3. Capitalism results in innovation

While it is true that there is innovation, It cannot be said that capitalism results in maximum innovation. There are important innovations to be made that wouldn"t be profitable. Let"s say, For example, That there is some very rare condition / disorder. In order to come up with treatment or a cure, There needs to be more funding and research. But due to how rare this condition is, It wouldn"t be profitable, Because due to the low amount of people that have it, The price would be high to make up for this. The, The price would have to drop to have them buy it, Hence losing profit either way. Innovation only happens when it is profitable to do so. Lots of companies now just move production overseas to profit, Rather than innovate. Some try and bring the competition down through ads or the state, So they don"t have to innovate to profit. Or as said before, They can just lower the quality to sell it cheaper and profit. Now how does this all relate to capitalism? Why is this the fault of capitalism? The answer is simple: In capitalism, Capital expands and concentrates; this is the natural result of the market. People expand and try to compete and out-compete. Now how does capital expand? Profit. Profit is needed to do so, It is what is seeked to do so.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 8 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.