Capitalism

Response point to Response Point 1: Substandard is a matter of perspective. Education in Scandinavia is not substandard by any means. Nor healthcare. Nor insurance. You once again use the argument "In America... [uncited opinion]". This debate IS NOT ABOUT AMERICA. Please realize this and look at it globally. "So Bad it's unconstitutional", whose constitution? Please leave YOUR country out of it, unless the examples you give can make a case for or against either system, independent of that country. America is not Socialist, therefore you cannot rate Socialism on the success/failure of America's social programs. Also, you claim that "you can pay [insurance] into the Government, and then pay for it again with taxes." ^Wrong. You pay taxes, and you get education and insurance AS A RESULT. It's essentially the same as paying a health insurer or college yourself, but the government manages it for you. RRP2: A Socialist government does not bailout businesses that fail. You have no evidence to support your claim that it does, either. Let's keep this civilized, please. RRP3: If you make $50,000 a year, then next year you make $55,000, are you going to put more into your savings account? Yes. Will that cycle your money back into the economy? NO. In fact, banks circulate your money through loans and investments, creating a financial gap with the money that ACTUALLY exists and the money that exists in computers. [10] RRP4: "Wikipedia is one of the most reliable and non-biased sources on the Internet" = False "The citizens are richer" = also false. They have more money, this does not make them richer by any means. In fact, when you factor for inflation, you'll see that income has stayed fairly constant compared to the income growth of the infamous "1%" that capitalists take no issue with. [11] RRP5: If Government owns the business, would they not have the right to hire who they like? In this regard, is the government owning a business in any way different from individuals owning a business? Are there not incompetent business owners? RRP6: In Capitalism, the driving force is competition, and you acknowledged this earlier in the debate. Now you state "it is not and should not be the goal of Capitalism". Regardless of whether or not it is the goal, it creates substandard business practices for the benefit of getting ahead. It is a byproduct of Capitalism that wears it down over time. RRP7: Competition does not increase prices, greed does. If BOTH competitors are greedy, prices will go up regardless. As for your argument about Substandard products, in a choice between quality and price most consumers pick low-cost items because they are cheaper. Walmart is a fine example of cheap, foreign-made goods ousting local business through unethical practices. RRP8: You speak as though people will only purchase what they can afford. This is false. Many buy items well-beyond their spending limit through credit cards and such, while others buy the cheap option to save themselves money, even if they could afford better. RRP11: the "Social" programs the United States government is enacting are by no means examples of successful socialism. In the Socialist state, people are not GIVEN anything as they are in the U.S.- they WORK for it. The difference is that you technically work FOR the government: It creates a new relationship (that of employer/employee) between the government and the citizen. This could be partially responsible for the tendency for extreme nationalism in Socialist states, but that is a mere speculation of mine. RRP12: I am not CONDEMNING capitalism by any means. I am suggesting that socialism is a better option. Capitalism works, but it's only short-term in the best of cases. RRP13: Didn't pure capitalism lead to business tycoons, robber barons, tenements, hoovervilles, and the Great Depression? I think that these examples of the results of pure capitalism are reasons enough to not use it. What "destroyed" America (You've got some nerve saying its destroyed when countries like Somalia and India are impoverished while we're buying IPhones and XBoxes by the millions...) was the strange hybrid-system that the U.S. Government developed, with the government offering the BENEFITS of socialism and the BENEFITS of capitalism, ignoring the detriments (socialism = high taxes, Capitalism = Big Business Domination). Since neither system is complete, both begin to malfunction. RRP14: People knew how to use power properly.... I can't believe what I am hearing. During this time people lived like rats! There was hardly any middle class at all. Up until the 1800's, big business hadn't existed, so everything that happened was experimental and the repercussions were not foreseen. RRP15: Once again, let's keep this civilized. I have no idea what you're talking about. My defense against your attacks: I'm not going to read arguments my opponent is too lazy to write down himself. This is a debate between him and I, and not between journalists and myself. Wikipedia is incapable of destroying ANY arguments. If you wish, you can click on Wikipedia's citations and use THOSE as legitimate sources, however I myself could edit Wikipedia to say whatever I wanted, if I were so inclined. You have made no new statements about the benefits of capitalism which I have not already refuted. You have also not done a very good job of defending Capitalism and fulfilling YOUR burden of proof (since you instigated the debate). Please satisfy these requirements in the last round. [10] http://money.howstuffworks.com... [11] http://www.globalissues.org...