On balance, Capitalism is a better system for mankind then Communism

Introduction: It seems as if CON has forfeited the round and closed his account. However, there are many arguments that I wish to address in cased he returns. I will be extended all my arguments as well. Rebuttal: 1. Many travesties are the fault of capitalism Con blames many travesties such as slavery . However, slavery has existed for thousands of years. It was the result of the industrial revolution took place that slavery was largely abolished. The industrial revolution was also a time in which strong capitalistic institutions flourished, including allowing financial institutions to charge interest. Communism can also be seen as mass-scale enslavement. If one does not wish to work in a communist society, then that’s too bad one has to work anyways. Workers who refuse to work are either imprisoned or killed in communist nations. Communism can only work if people are forced to work, since then people wouldn’t work if property is not redistributed based on how much one works. Con also states that murder is a “capitalist” institution. This is also an absurd notion. In hunter-gather societies, which are communist in nature, death rates caused through warfare are extraordinary high, much higher than in capitalist nations [1]. Murder is also illegal in capitalism so this point is completely moot. I will go onto continue rebutting some of the further claims: Arguments: 1. The Social Calculation problem Extent my argument to the problems of democracy in solving the social calculation problem. While it might be easy to figure out that people desire food, it’s more difficult to figure out what type of food people desire. Capitalist nations have a higher standard of living to feed all its civilians. However, as stated before, communist nations have had famine epidemics. Different types of food come at different opportunity costs. For example, meat products need to be fed plants. These plants could’ve been used for human consumption as opposed to meat products. The farm land could be used for alternative uses as well. A factory could be used in the land, a park, and so forth. That is the social calculation problem that needs to be solved, since all goods and services come at an opportunity cost and scarcity exists. CON also states that “two heads are better than one”. However, this argument is mainly a non-sequiter because it does not address anything I said and there are millions of different companies, so there’s more than just “one head”. Con further explains that capitalism failed based on the housing bubble crash. However, it should be noted that there were actually tons of regulations in the housing industry. The US has its own “housing and urban development” department, had government-sponsored enterprises like Freddie and Fannie Mac giving out mortgage loans, the community reinvestment act, and deductibles for house ownership. The US government did everything it could to push home ownership. Even if it is the case that these housing problems were the result of resource misallocation and distribution, this problem is nothing compared to communism where famines occur, ghost cities exist, and it takes hours to wait in line for bread. 2. Empirical Evidence of the failure of communism and the success of capitalism Extend my arguments. CON’s arguments are incoherent so I cannot respond to many of them. “ Give him something worse. The 21st of December 2012 doomsday missile Illuminati magic hidden bastards missile, say. Fvcked! There we go. And conspiracy!! And now nobody's taking me seriously... but seriously, this is what you're dealing with.” I’m sorry, the argument here is what? 3. The Tragedy of the commons. Extent my previous arguments. He states that “those left with nothing after everything has been grabbed up are left to starve, or to turn against their fellow man to survive.”. This does not make sense because as I said previously the standards of living has been increasing. And it hasn’t been coming at the expense of poor nations, since poorer nations are also increasing the standard of living as well. As this graph shows[2], everyone is richer than they were in the 1800s, even present day African nations are richer than the US and Ireland was in 1800. CON states that the solution is to “split up the fields and maintenance”. However, splitting up the fields is the establishment of property rights. Furthermore one does not have the incentive to do maintenance on any property except their own, since they will not benefit from their labor. One does not see people mowing another person’s lawn for free. You also can’t do maintenance on the land, one would just have to graze less. 4. Innovation incentive and productive efficiencyExtend arguments. http://i30.tinypic.com...[1] http://tinyurl.com...[2]