Capitalism

Thank you for your Rebuttal. I will now refute your arguments made in the third round. My third round arguments were mostly debunking anti capitalist arguments. Anyways, time for the rebuttal: "I would like to point out that there is basically no purely capitalist country today. Free market capitalism is basically extinct, as most governments are taking active roles in the economy in some form. Whether it's by providing social programs, bailing companies out when they need to be, setting regulations on business" The same exact argument has been used against capitalism over and over again. This would be more accurately described as crony "capitalism", a system in which close relations to the government is required for success. Everyone should know what crony capitalism is. "Capitalism was tried in the 1800s, and it resulted in poorly paid workers, terrible working conditions, growing wealth inequality" This was a very early early form of capitalism, and even then, money was worth alot more back then. For example, a $18.32 was equal to $1 back in 1800, and $27.48 was equal to $1 by the end of the 1800's. The reason for poor working conditions could be easily atrributed to the limited technology of that time. I am not sure what my opponent is trying to say when he says "growing wealth inequality", but I think he is saying here that people being people not having the same exact amount as everyone else is a bad thing? In some cases it is (such as the little amount of poverty in capitalist countries), but, assuming he means that, he is saying that all cases of people being richer than others is bad. "Capitalism is immoral because it has an unncessary position which takes money away from people who could be earning it instead. Under capitalism, it requires the private ownership of a company, which means there is/are a sole or just a few business owners. The bussines owner is an unnecessary position and they take a percentage of the profits based on what the workers do. That profit could be distributed amongst the workers if the business owner was not there and the employees owned the business." A business is basicly an organization in which the owner or owners sell a product or service and they pay people to do it for them. And they keep the rest of the money. Thats basicly how it works, and there have been many cases of single workers making more than CEO's and/or business owners, such as with Amazon. "The fact that cooperatives do exist, show that a business owner is not necessary. While someone could argue that since there are so few cooperatives, this shows that a business owner is necessary in order to have success in a company, this is proven false with the facts I showed about cooperatives in the previous debate round." There are a ton of other factors than just not being a cooperative to why businesses fail. Whats intresting about this argument is you do not need socialism to found cooperatives. "I could provide numerous examples of countries that did terribly under capitalism" Same for socialist countries. My opponent has used GDP growth as an argument in socialist countries as an argument, but what also needs to be included is the rate of growth compared to the previous GDP of said country. For example, if someone has $1, and gets 10%, they'll have $1.10. If someone has $2, and they get 10%, they'll have $2.20. http://www.businessdictionary.com... http://www.in2013dollars.com... http://www.in2013dollars.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... (yet again)http://www1.salary.com... http://www.payscale.com... https://smallbiztrends.com... https://en.wikipedia.org...