Capitalism is better than Socialism

I would like to start off by countering some of your points. First you said that "money making should not be the government's concern". A government does not make money on its own, and even in the most capitalist countries the government relies on taxes for its source of income. A government role isnt to make money or provide for its people. In a capitalist country, a government's role is to protect its people (military and police), and coin money. There are a few other minor roles, but they're insignificant. You said that capitalism cannot provide for its people. I would have to completely disagree as the history shows otherwise. The private industry can do anything the government can do, with higher quality and more efficiency. Everything that is privately run is far more efficient than any government program. Education, healthcare (the quality of it), transportation, mailing. While in a socialist country, the services are limited in both quality and speed. The reasons for this are simple. With a single payer system, the government has no competition. They provide a service, and that is your only option whether you like it or not. They Wil never run out of business so there is little motivation for improvement. In a capitalist country, all sorts of companies from all services will compete to have the best service because that's what makes them money. This not only improves the quality of the product/service, but it gives you a wide variety of choices. Capitalism provides for its people in a different way, by letting them do it themselves. While In a socialist country you get services by the government, who takes a high percentage of your earnings to pay for those services. The quality or availability are non-negotiable. In a capitalist country however, due to very low taxes, you can pay for a service yourself snd it can be any quality you choose, and it would be more efficient than a government run service. In either case you pay for it, rather trough taxes or your savings, nothing is "free". You mention the percentage of poor in the US. Well yes, no country can ever completely get rid of poverty. In America however, the poor are far better off than the poor even in countries such as Norway. Poverty isnt permanent. There is pnly a very small number of people who live in poverty their whole life. They get better work experience and move into the middle class. You cant ignore the fact that the US has a high rate of immigration, which effects the number of poor. In Sweden, the rate of immigration is increasing fast, and along with it are the number of poor people. my point is you can only get rid of poverty by giving the poor the opportunity to make money through jobs. Giving them handouts through welfare doesnt do that. It only prolongs poverty, giving little motivation for that person to find a job. During the 60's, president Lyndon Johnson declared a war on poverty, which massive amounts of tax dollars went into welfare programs. It had little effect. Poverty did not go down at all, and the number of food stamp usage increased! This shows the government can not end poverty. One last thing, you said those who are "already rich". Nobody is already rich. They became rich through hard work. Many rich people started off poor, and it wasnt the government who gave them their success.