Communism > Capitalism

Good luck to him in our future arguments. Pro claims that communism implies equality for its citizens, but never really states why this equality is a good thing. My opponent also hasn't given a reason for why having a lawless society is a positive thing for society. Who would stop individuals from murdering, raping, or stealing? Would these things be allowed? Having no currency offers problems for communist nations. There is a problem to its growth from there being no incentives for working more or working better. Only Capitalism gives workers incentives for better, more productive work. If a worker is given incentives for their work (example: more money that they can use to on needs and wants) the economy would no doubt rise accordingly. If a hard worker is getting the same pay and same benefits as a worker who is doing the minimum, they will eventually stop working to their best and do what the other guy is. Why not? They are getting the same things. There are no incentives to work harder, invent anything, or progress anything in a communist nation. Also, workers have better environments in a Capitalistic nation. Where as in a communist nation, workers are not allowed to go on strike. Capitalism allows for workers to negotiate their wages, where in communism, there is a set wage for work - doctors and factory line workers make the same amount of money for completely different work. In Capitalism, the value of your product or service to the buyer effects the price. If the quality of your work is horrible, people wont pay a high price for it - losing you money and allowing your business to fail. In a communist nation, the product or service can be horrible, but there is no real way of getting better product because the supplier can not go out of business. In communism, there is no real incentive to strive, merely to maintain the functional status quo. In a Capitalist government, everyone has the same potential to achieve wealth, but of course this all depends on their personal abilities. Smart and creative people make more money, thus encouraging a social Darwinism that supplies better products and services. People do business with people that are good at what they do. Money is a reward for good, creative, wanted/needed work. The economy and living standard rises, and the progression of society furthers. In a communist government, as my opponent stated, there is no monetary incentive and thus leaving the workers to do minimal work for the same pay they would be getting doing greater work. Capitalism increases labor productivity because of these incentives, and thus trumping in that regard communism. A large problem with communism is their central planners don't even know who needs what in their society. Capitalism enables more efficient resource allocation. Capitalism also allows for saving and investing, where as communism uses all of its resources (as it only produces a set amount, never more than it needs) each year, leaving them nothing in case of something like a famine. Supply and demand is a forceful mistress, and it will most definitely create a richer economy that will meet all of the citizen's needs (instead of a group of planners giving a list of set services and goods to supply the society without ever really progressing or changing to suite new needs etc). Communism doesn't supply the rights that Capitalism does. Capitalism gives individuals the rights of life, liberty, petition and property. The citizen owns his own body, life, mind, actions, and tangible and intellectual property he creates. Communism only supplies theft. Communism takes the hard work of one individual and uses it to aid another individual who is of no use to the society. In this way, it is not moral. It forces people to sacrifice in order for other individuals to survive - encouraging parasite behavior. Countries with a majority of capitalistic standards have higher standards of living for their citizens. Communism does not deal with the human condition. When communism mostly puts emphasis on equality, capitalism emphasizes freedom and quality. Freedom is, above all, the most moral ideal. Forced equality is not moral. It creates a slave like attitude and forced liking. Underneath it all, people will get jealous that the lazy worker is making the same as them, and this communism can't control. Communism has no future, where as Capitalism supplies the potential for progression and quality. Even education in a Capitalist nation is far better than a communist one. The individual pays if the individual wishes to go. The system works better as they don't have the problems of teacher motivation and work quality, and school funding like elementary, middle, and high schools. Private colleges have the best professors, the best education provided (because the professors get incentives for working there… higher pay, help in advancement of their research with better equipment, etc). The list could go on and on about how the system offers better education. If there were more private colleges, there would also be more competition, and lower prices because of this competition. There is another key word; competition. Competition raises quality and lowers prices, helps specialize fields, leads new developments, a higher demand in research, and pushes toward perfecting goods and services. Communism supplies no competition. My opponent claims that communism is superior to Capitalism because it gives society equality - and this, he states, is the main ideal of society. Unfortunately, humans get bored, want more out of life, and want to learn, explore, and discover things about reality. Giving a false sense of equality is, actually, the real injustice. A smarter individual is superior over a dumber one. A stronger individual is superior over a weaker one. A more creative individual is far superior over a dull one. Communism breeds stagnation, breeds an "aristocracy of non-value" in which groups claim privileges for disability, poverty, misfortune, incompetence—i. e. , for a lack, rather than for achievement. If a person is physically unable to do work, there is mental work he can do (just look at the great Steven Hawking). If he is unable to do either one, then he shouldn't suck up resources of an individual that is striving. That striving individual has the right to his own accomplishments and shouldn't have them taken away from him. Unfortunately, communism tries to trade one supposed "wrong" for another greater wrong -- advocating theft. If self-sacrifice is an ideal—if service to others is the highest, most honorable course of action—why not force people to act accordingly? This is exactly what happened in the Soviet Union, where several generations lived in misery and oppression as a sacrifice to a future workers' paradise. Capitalism makes less people miserable. Communism lets everyone share in that misery. As Adlai E Stevenson is quoted in saying, "Communism is the death of the soul. It is the organization of total conformity - in short, of tyranny - and it is committed to making tyranny universal. " There is no individualism and no creativity. Citizens of a capitalist nation earn their homes, earn their cars, and earn their glories. No one has the right to anyone else's work, anyone else's sweat, anyone else's time, mind, and energy. To distribute such would be robbery. This is what communism is. "Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much. ' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have so much. '" -- Quote Phelps Adams Capitalism is superior to communism. Regards, Vi