Capitalism: part II

Response to Point 1: I don't know your schedule exactly, so here is the article again if you have time: http://www.stocks-simplified.com.... If not, don't worry about it. Anyway, my arguments I used in "Response to Point 1" from Round 2 are extended to this round since you did not post a rebuttal to my statements. Response to Point 2: Since you have failed to provide even a response for Point 2, I will just add an attack along with my previous statement "Defense Point 2" from Round 1. "Capitalism demands the very best of every person and rewards him or her according to his efforts and skills, accordingly. It allows anyone the freedom to choose the work or business of their skill and interest, and to trade that labor or product for either the equivalent monetary value, or an equally desirable product or service in trade (which the IRS would now still tax!). The value of a person's work is determined by the free market where there is a 100% correlation between the value added to society and the compensation earned in return. In true capitalism, it is the consumer is king.": http://www.myfreedompost.com.... Now please debate in Point 2 this quote and my previous post from Round 1. Response to Point 3: Since you can not come up with a better rebuttal for this point, and your rebuttal was to look at your Point 1, I must again say my arguments I used in "Response to Point 1" from Round 2 are extended to this round since you did not post a rebuttal to my statements. Response to Point 4: Well the Government paying for jobs is certainly not a Capitalistic idea. " Under capitalism, it is the government's job to make sure there is a level playing field for privately-run companies by enforcing laws and regulations.": http://bizfinance.about.com.... The Government dosen't add jobs in Capitalism. Response to Point 5: There should be no need for sources. People everywhere across the United States are getting richer. That is a fact. Even with the recession, the vast majority say that they are better off economically than they were in the year 2000. The unemployment rate is reasonable (compared to a lot of countries), and the inflation rate is almost negligable. But in countries like Spain with a very high unemployment rate and Venezuela with a very high inflation rate, Socialism is proven wrong. Even Singapore and New Zealand, who are even more Capitalism than we are have almost no cyclical unemployment ever, and a very small inflation rate with little poverty. Response to Point 6: I said that the Government taxes people until they have little savings money, and you backed me up by saying that most socialistic countries have a 75% taxation rate. Thank you. Response to Point 7: That quote backs up something I like to call the "welfare effect". It states that "once a person is on enough welfare to sustain themselves for a long period of time, most people, even once their financial situation improves, will not want to go back to work because they can just get free money from the Government, and they don't even have to do anything". More simply, if you worked a hard job and earned $50,000 a year, then you became unemployed, and got $45,000 in unemployment benefits per year, would you give that up and go back to your job? No. Why? Becuase you get money for nothing. Response to Point 8: Thanks again for destroying your own argument. This means that you just said that socialism makes people live bad lives and have no savings. Response to Point 9: Amount of money and buying power are two different things. Amount of money is how much money you have. Buying power is how much you can buy with that money. If your salary gets a yearly bonus each year that equal the yearly inflation rate, you have more money, but you can not buy anything more because your money is worth less. Get it? And if your raise always equals the inflation rate, you do not have any more buying buying power than you did last year. But in Capitalism, where you usually get a extra bonus ON TOP of the inflation rate, the employee actually has more buying power. Do you get it? Raising with the inflation rate is not raising the real wage. Response to Point 10: My point was that if Governments stopped doing the Socialistic practice of bailing out big businesses, then the government's debt would not be so high. Bailing out businesses increases the debt or decrease tax revenue. Response to Point 11: Think of it this way; a stick of dynomite blows up a very stable building (very safe, sturdy, and zoned). Did the building cause it's own collapse? No. The dynomite did. The building was very stable (like the stable 1920s Stock Market), but the dynomite blew it up (the beginning recession of the late 1920s). Get it? The stock market did not cause the great depressions. Stock markets can not cause a economic crash. Response to Point 12: You did not post a rebuttal, but a very gramatically incorrect sentence which I do not get for that reason. Please one, elaborate on that, and two, make your grammar better. Attack Point 1: "Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism.":http://en.wikiquote.org....... Do you get this statement? I was just saying that you can not condemn Capitalism for the things wrong with the American and European Economics since neither of them have had Capitalistic Economics in 80 years. Attack Point 2: "Capitalism is the only economic system in the world that promotes voluntary excellence in individuals. Individuals are rewarded based on the amount of value they provide to the market. Capitalism provides incentives to be great and invent things that were never thought possible. It is a system that promotes growth among individuals and society as a whole.":http://conservativeeconomics.blogspot.com....... This means that Capitalism allows for the individual employee do not only need to do the best he or she can, but for he or she to want to the the best he or she can so that they can earn more money. Capitalism makes businesses and employees want to do better so the business can make more money, and not go bankrupt, and so the employee make more money, and not go unemployed. It gives incentives for progress and productivity. Socialism does not, and that is why Socialistic Countries eventually fall behind on the world stage and economy. Attack Point 3: Besides China, how many countries are economically, politically, and socially stable in this article?:http://en.wikipedia.org....... Please answer me. Or will it destroy your argument? LANNAN13: I have delayed this as long as I could. I hope I have given you enough time. You have until 12:18 PM on Monday to post your argument for Round 3. VOTERS: If lannan13 does not post his argument for Round 3, please forgive him.