Capitalism is better than Socialism.

I answered Point 3 implicitly. (Although it is obvious that Pro really likes the excessive explicit style of arguing in the passive voice, which is also a very rude one, explaining ironically the implicit intentions of his contender instead of an neutral response, effectively claiming a priori knowledge.) 1. Survival of oneself as well as one another can also be achieved via cooperation not only via social-Darwinism. The survival of the fittest is a scheme of lesser intelligence and nature presents various systems of cooperation in it's very core. The very first occurrence is the symbiosis of the single-cell with mitochondria as a win-win situation. You are obviously referring to the old scheme of capalism like the UDssR, DDR or Cuba since your premise seems to be that there can not be anything substantial archived outside of capitalism. I am not arguing about bringing back old socialistic systems, since they were in essence totalitarian states and claiming those to be truly marxistic and representiv would make Marx turning in his grave. Your idea about work is also full of unspoken presumptions. In a society were technology is used to full effect, reduced work hours are a consequence. Also, there does not have to be a monetary system like today, for obvious reasons private banks and capitalistic theory are not a good ground of proof of alternative systematic approaches. Money is not sent from the heavens nor found under a stone, it is merely a human invention undergoing change. Assuming workload and payment to be identical to your very resident right now is outright limitating at best. Of course "they will achieve as much as possible and work as hard as possible to receive as much as possible", since this is the price of capitalistic thinking. I will therefore delight you of alternatives. It is not about going With one another but against it. In this society, your are competing for survival.- This is not a socialistic pragma. In Marxism, we are working with another to archive as much as possible for each other. This is not pure theory. There are, also in the US, firms who completely share their revenue across every employee equally and every decision is voted for by everybody. Guess what? The employees suddenly like working. They discuss their workload, take interest in their product outside of pure financial growth but also because of community, work more and are more productive. Why? Because suddenly this is not an anonymous Warehouse anymore where people drag themselves to for "Survival" but because of conviction. The man at the machines earns the same as the man running the office since pay is structured after workload. And suddenly people like working in those "lower" sectors. No grief. Of course not everything is gold, but that is always the case when people cooperate. Conflict is necessary and healthy when shared.- Not endured. In the course of history, over 2000 fiat currencies where born and dried out, therefore the probability of our modern currency undergoing a rapid change is likely and very much observable for many years. Your idea of the modern monetary system as constant is illusory. The point is: It does not have to be the way it is now. The basic question is therefore: "Can socialism be implemented with the use of other tools and technologies? " Instead of relying on the obviously lost ground of past experiences. I also pointed your attention (in point 3) to the very real example of free software or technologies like the Internet.- Since they are in the very essence, socialistic. Hundreds of thousands of people write software day in and out to purse a sense of community that is not restricted. And most of them don't even remotely get paid but working immensly to archive products for free firms may need to invest million of dollars. The idea that people only work for wealth aka homo economicus is extremely oversimplified. Without the lots of people working voluntary in every aspect of modern culture the Capitalistic society would ve been long collapsed. Moreover, you are living on an island, in two ways. The US, and your social class in modern Capitalism. Don't think your life standards would be possible without the army of third-world workers employed oversees under inhuman conditions to ship you your ipad. You seem to live in the idea of 19th century nationalism. In the globalized word, there is either master or server. And Europe's as Americas servants are effectively half the other world, fighting for survival in pointless conditions. Also, just stating that a is not b because a is not b is neither worth the discussion nor the effort