The Instigator
yuhancui0726
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
WrickItRalph
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Communism is better that extreme lassez-faire capitalism

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 1 vote the winner is...
WrickItRalph
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/10/2019 Category: Economics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,039 times Debate No: 120737
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (24)
Votes (1)

 

yuhancui0726

Pro

First model.
I define communism as an economic system in which all assets are state owned, Citizens are required to work for free for a number of hours that is required for the production of enough food and material, Government distributes wealth equally amongst individuals. Laissez-faire capitalism is capitalism based on the "invisible hand" principle, There is no government interaction.

My first contention is that communism protects the environment. It has been seen throught communist and socialist states that their levels of pollution are lower than other nations. We can also see a correlation between capitalism and pollution. A recent study at the university of Wisconsin-Madison found that, "It was post-Mao capitalist development that propelled unbreathable cities to flourish and the country to overtake the US as the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. " It is also not a coincidence that most green parties support socialist or communist parties at elections.
WrickItRalph

Con

Okay, So for starters, I'm okay with your definition of communism. It's not the EXACT one that I would use, But functionally, It appears to fit the bill.

I'm not sure if the invisible hand principle is a realistic portrayal of capitalism. I'm willing to argue for a loosely regulated capitalism, Since that would fit the current state of affairs that we live in, But I don't see how arguing for completely government free capitalism is productive, Since such a system is neither popular nor practical.

I'm not completely polar on the topic, I think some aspects of communism are useful, But I think the model as a whole is simply too delicate to thrive on a global scale. At best, A small society would be able to take advantage of communism. But the topic is not merely about small communities, So we'll have to look at both systems on a micro and macro scale respectively.

On a small scale, Communism is very efficient, Everybody gets to eat, Everybody has to work. Those who go against the grain can always move or will get pressured by the community to participate. The community will have a major voice in things like infrastructure, Tourism, And local economy. Hopefully, This builds a proper steel man of your position. Now to take it to the large scale. So the problem arises at this point, About the motivation of the people to participate in communism. Now the majority has a global lynch pin on policy. Personal freedoms evaporate due to communal pressure to only work for food production. Art declines, People stop working, The community feels cheated and start enforcing punishments on those who don't work and the accused has no other place to go to escape this system. There is also the problem of policy implementation. Communism necessarily implies state control. This means policies are implemented by the majority with no checks or balances and money has to go to a treasury to be mitigated to the population. This means at any moment, The treasury could face problems and, With all of our eggs in one basket, The country would face a large scale crisis over night. The control over the economy also causes issues. In a communism, Income has to be precisely budgeted at all times and halts financial freedom for citizens. This means that productivity has to be matched to these budgets and the natural flow of supply and demand would experience irregularities. This could cause production to be an issue, Since any type of surplus in product could be impossible to ever sell off. This means we would always be one fiscal quarter away from a great depression.

I'm almost out of characters, So I'll cover capitalism to some large extent in my next statement

Your floor
Debate Round No. 1
yuhancui0726

Pro

I am seeing that you like many other people are focusing on the short term detrimental effects of communism. It is the same behaviour that makes later year draft picks in the NFL not as valuable as earlier year draft picks. This kind of behaviour can be very detrimental.

I am trying to argue for the long run. Laissez-faire policies can be very destructive in the long run. It creates inequality and social and environmental problems, Which you have not rebutted.

You were talking about surplus in supply. This may happen and may be inefficient but the current capitalist system takes unnecessary ressources. Much of our ressources is used to fend off competitors.

Our current system has the upper class living lavish lifestyle while the lower classes live in trash and have to eat the upper class's trash.
WrickItRalph

Con

So a couple of things. You say I'm only focusing on the short term effects. There's a limit to how far we can predict anything into the future, So going too far would be a slippery slope fallacy. We have no good way to determine which of the two systems would be better in the long run. We can only look at the models the have been presented to us and then make strong probabilistic arguments going slightly in to the future. That's it. Unless you can provide me with evidence of your claim of long term benefits/drawbacks, It's just a claim.

Can you prove that the current system takes unnecessary resources? The basics of supply and demand suggest otherwise so I'm going to need some logical argument of why this is true without just claiming it.

Can you prove that communism stops social classes from happening? Practically speaking, I don't see how any system could stop people from hoarding money and lording over people. You can't make having money illegal.

You make a claim that capitalism causes more pollution, But you didn't show any correlation, So it's just a claim. How do we know that democracy or puritanism isn't the cause of the pollution? Communism and Capitalism aren't the only differing factors in pollution, So these two things alone are not enough to prove the correlation.

Capitalism allows for the maximum financial freedom of the citizens and is much easier to regulate than Communism. It has been shown that the best way to address personal freedom is to grant everybody every freedom and then slowly take away the bad ones and financial freedom is no exception to this rule. So capitalism makes more sense because we grant financial freedom and then take away certain aspects of it for the net well being of the citizens as a whole. Communism does the opposite. They start with no financial freedom and require citizens to walk a financial tightrope. Capitalism allows people to pursue any career and even take breaks from working to hold out for better jobs. Communist societies would have restricted job opportunities and would force people into jobs that they might not even be good at or just outright hate.

Now of course, We could always make similar changes to Communism to make up for what it lacks, But in the end, I think Modified Communism and Modified Capitalism and up being the same thing.

Your floor
Debate Round No. 2
yuhancui0726

Pro

Capitalism creates many of our social problems. Competition creates lots of damage. For firms, This can mean engaging in criminal activities like money laundering and collusion. The term "dog eat dog" capitalism refers to the fact that when there is too much competition, One person will try to "eat" their competition, I. E. To ruin them. Take, For example, The airline industry. It is very competitive, With no airline company having more that 20% of the market share, And with the 4 biggest airline companies" shares at 3% of each other. This creates many dodgy things, Such as the collusion claim last June against American, SouthWest, United Continental and Delta.

For individuals this can mean social setbacks. It damages relationships as competition creates feelings of superiority as you must defeat your opponents. Also, The ones that have failed see themselves as worthless. Furthermore, Competition pushes one to work more and more, Leading to overwork. We can see this in Japan where young men are so burnt out, Their wander away from society in a condition known as Hikikomori. This is also detrimental because it forces one to get away from celebrating successes and achievements in favour of beating our competitors. Ever wondered why Bill Belichick never smiles? Football has been hailed as the most competitive of the major team sports in the US(see Scorecasting by Tobias Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim) and its competitiveness is taking a toll on Belichick. To quote the activist of Sure We Can! Pierre Simmons speaking at the UN, "When a man"s whole life has been nothing but an endless stream of disappointments and setbacks, He loses hope and may in some cases begin to doubt his own worth as a man. " This is the kind of atmosphere that capitalism creates.

Capitalism creates inequality.
Capitalism unevenly redistributes wealth. In fact, In the US, The wealthiest 20% own 85% of the wealth. And the poorest 20% do not own anything and are in debt. No government interference means that the upper class can get rich at the costs of the poor. This in turn creates differences between the classes and creates relative poverty. Relative poverty is more destructive than any poverty. The poor may see their existence as worthless. And as Pierre Simmons said, The poor may feel low self-esteem which can lead to apathy. Pierre Simmons was poor when he was a child. As an adult, He made an income by picking refundable bottles. He had a very good quote to say about his profession. "When people see you, They point out "Oh, Look at that man, He"s picking up our trash". But you can"t let that stop you. You gotta pay your rent. " Many poor people are affected by the stigma of being poor and their lives are destroyed.

"Inequality actually undermines a person"s willingness to protect the environment. "
-- economist Lucas Chancel

As I have mentioned before, Capitalism creates environmental problems. I am running out of space so I will address this later.
WrickItRalph

Con

All of the problems you mentioned would still happen with communism, Except for the competition. So that's the only part I will address.

competition is a good thing, It stop price gauging and forces the business to hear the demands of the consumer. In a communist market. Businesses would have no motivation or obligation to provide top level products or services. This means that the quality of the businesses will fall and prices will start to be unreasonable due to the poor quality of the items and services. You talk about competition causing crime. This is an appeal to fear. Anybody can argue that anything causes crime. Capitalism is not a high risk factor for crime, So crime isn't a good reason. If this was a debate about gangs, Then that would be a different story.

As for you comments about people being overworked, That is a valid point, But communism doesn't fix it and it can easily be fixed in capitalism using the same methods. So why change governments to fix a problem that could have been fixed without changing governments?

Your floor
Debate Round No. 3
yuhancui0726

Pro

This debate has been about the themes of fairness, Crime, And the environment.
In terms of environment, I have said that if we do not stop capitalism, Our environment will degrade(it already is because of the dirty and selfish politicians who want re-election). During the industrial revolution, England had a laissez-faire policy which resulted in enriching the English newest elite, The businessmen. It degraded the English air so much that England(London) became synonymous with smog. Capitalism creates environmental problems.
It is not a coincidence that the six most capitalist countries(Germany, United States, China, India, Japan, Russia) are the six most polluting nations. We also have to think of the other living beings that we are harming such as animals and plants. It is also biting us. It is estimated that 7 million people worldwide die every year from"exposure to fine particles in polluted air that lead to diseases such as stroke, Heart disease, Lung cancer, Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases and respiratory infections, Including pneumonia"according to the World Health Organisation.
What has opp said? That there is no correlation. Well, Opp has just disagreed with the majority of the economists.
Capitalism does cause crime. Maybe opp disagrees because they think crime is only about gangs, But it is much more. Investigative reporter Nick Davies, Who uncovered the UK hacking scandal, Had this to say, "rogue corporations have been allowed to flourish--and to break the rules and to make comrades of the police and the government--because it has grown up in a wider system[capitalism] which has encouraged it. "
In terms of fairness, Capitalism has widened our inequality so much that it is now more that France just before the revolution. Capitalism is also responsible for the poverty cycle. We have effectively come back to feudal Europe where birth determines later life. The sociologist Karl Alexander did a study and found out that poor students" academic scores improved more than rich kids during the year. But when I came to summer vacation, Rich kids had the edge as their parents are able to afford classes. This gives an edge to rich kids in finding success. How terrible it is when children"s parent financial situation determines their destiny.
As you can see, I have won all 3 themes. Let"s give a message to the filthy capitalists who "sat on the boards of Victorian coal mines, Explaining gently that they must preserve the right of children to work down and that they must resist the dogooders who would take away the free choice of those children, Were the shipmasters who argued that it was their duty to provide good strong cheap labour from Africa from the king"s dominions whose growth was essential to England's wellbeing and that good people must understand the conditions endured by a savage on the verge of starvation is less than an English worker.
Let's not go back to cruel feudalism.
Vote for progress
Vote for fairness
Vote proposition!
WrickItRalph

Con

After I said there was no correlation, You said that I disagreed with the majority of economists, But you didn't provide any data to back this up. You quoted a reporter, But reporters are not experts in anything. That's no better than an opinion.

It's not that your claims have no truth in them at all. But the methodology of your argument is fallacious. You attribute capitalism with crime and pollution in an attempt to scare us into communism, But there are two problems with this methodology.

1) You have not given us sufficient data of the crime rates and pollution and there possible correlation to capitalism.

2) You have not given us sufficient data in order to conclude that the same thing would not happen under communism.

Without having this information, It's just speculation. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When you claim an entire system of government is better than the other and you're only argument is a critique of the competition, Then you need to make sure that the evidence for that critique is extraordinary.

Our current model of capitalism has stood the test of time so far and we have a productive and thriving nation. I close by saying that anyone who wants to mess up that model, Needs to bring infallible evidence to the table.

Good Debate
Debate Round No. 4
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by yuhancui0726 3 years ago
yuhancui0726
watch "the rich, The poor, And the trash" a documentary by DW
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
I'll look into that
Posted by yuhancui0726 3 years ago
yuhancui0726
Economists such as Lucas Chancel from the Paris Economic school and Iwai Katsuhito from the Japan Academy and International Christian University. He is also Professor Emeritus at the University of Tokyo. They all agree the capitalism causes pollution. Search the web. There are countless studies.
Posted by yuhancui0726 3 years ago
yuhancui0726
how is a nation prosperous if there are people who live and work in trash.
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
*lo
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
le espero tu argumento
Posted by yuhancui0726 3 years ago
yuhancui0726
no es una mantira, I will contest this in my argument
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
*Instead of living equally* sorry, Typo
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
How about living equally, We live equitably
Posted by WrickItRalph 3 years ago
WrickItRalph
what do you mean by again? I only said one thing. How can I be a communist twice? Lol
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bzdogs 3 years ago
bzdogs
yuhancui0726WrickItRalphTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: The argument said it all. Never changed my mind.

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