Capitalism as an economic system functions better than Socialism.

1. your premise lacks an understaning of scarcity. The problem in economics and is trying to allocate scarce reasources properly. I say that society and resoureces are to scarce to be rulled by a rulling class. They don't understand it enough. I can agree with the idea of the punishment being in proportion to ones abilities for violations like parking. I think it would be difficult to administer practically. I agree that is an injustice but just like in a city there are scarce resources, they literally have a limited number of parking spaces and with that premise we must decide who should get preferrential treatement? Well the person who is willing to pay the most should get the best spots seems to be fair, the other alternative could be whoever gets there first but that is not monitizing the value. If you monitize the value then that creates jobs which creates income which provides for the poor. Parking does have value, If you have a reason to be in a place like a city where there is parking then your reason to be there is as valuable to you, as you are willing and able to pay for it. I never pay 20 dollars to park because I do not value parking that much I would always find a cheaper option and I think in capitalist system thats part of the governments responsiblity but I think they should allow corporations to run the alternative options because again that creates jobs which creates income which reduces poverty much more than a free parking spot. If they let people in companies run the trains then they are incentivized to run the trains on time, as nice as people are willing to sit through, and to try and get as many people as possible. If the train runs on time, is kinda clean, and affordable, more people would be willing to sit through the ride at that price rather than pay 20 to park. This way it gives people the options of how they want to spend the money they earn. For people that don't work and are paid a subsidy it can be stressful for them to have to start working, yes. Not all stress is bad stress. Some stress is good. Like when we stress steel to make it stronger. Small Business owners make up a significant amount of the wealth of the U.S. and running a business is stressful. If it is not stressful then it is not rewarding. Meaningfulness in work is an important idea although danegerously tangent from this topic. Shortly I will say capitalism has monetized a wide range of jobs of verying signifcance. in Capitalism people choose to work those jobs. no one forces them. I suppose the issue I have with our debate is you don't like force or oppression but you advocate a system that requires force and opression. domminance hiegarcies have existed at every level for a long time. Even lobsters have domminance hiegarcies and capitalism is more dominent than socialism because more people choose to ingage with it on a daily basis. Socialsim, or communism has to force people to engage with it. So much so that these countries will filter the internet so that people are not exposed to it. So to the karl max real communism. It cannot exist without power. you are debating an illogical stance on power that is self evident. You cannot say that an object moving at 100 mph has no power and if something tries to stop it then it gets punished. We would witness the power of the object moving at 100 mph when it punishes whatever is trying to stop it. This is the fallacy of the logical arguement for communism. This is why we have never seen true karl marx communism. It doesn't exist. Just like saying it would be great if everyone rode unicorns and they expelled gas that smelled like kittens only your arguement is much more subtle. Power and dommince does exist and to say it would not exist in a communism society is becasue we would remove desire doesn't work because people want things anyone and then saying well in a communist society they would be punished. Who would punish them if there is no authority? the GOV't? how can you say the government would punish them if the government doesn't have power and doesn't do much. take money out of the equation and it is just people bartering and trading tangible goods and services. This does localize services but it creates poverty because people that lived on goven't subsitence now have nothing to trade and are truely stressful because they cannot barter and trade nothing for something. 2. there are laws against speeding yet people still speed. laws only have power if people choose to live by them. if governemnt has control of punishment, money, and is allowed to steal from people then why would they give that money away? if i was a rich person in your system I would just join the government and say I don't have any money and spend my time stealing punishing and controling society. There is nothing in your system to prevent this.if you force a person to work making cookies that cost that person money then they will stop making cookies because it is bad for them. like touching a hot stove if you turn the stove on and tell people they have to keep touching the hot stove they will eventually stop listening to you. Yes either of us could make the tv or hamburgers but my arguement is both of us want to make hamburgers or both of us want to make tvs how does communism decided who gets to do what because both have to be done. it doesn't deal with scarcity. there are no reasons for people to figure that out because it does not benefit 1 person to look for an alternate food source for the entire population. I would rather a world that the person with the best quality hamburger at the best price be elevated over the person with the bad hamburgers at low prices. except before there was a government in the U.S. John Smith had to implement rules of you dont work then you don't eat because even back then people would choose to let other people do the hard work for them. I think you should spend some time getting to know how people behave in the real world then apply that to your theoretical utupian principles. netflix, high quality good can be purchased as low at 8 dollars a month. apple has a lot of technical parts and require number of engineers to organize the componets and resources. To just call it a hunk of parts is not realistic. If you think so try taking it apart and putting it back together. Most people wouldn't be able to. that is not always the case. and if you have a signifcant number of the population in jail even if they want to feed them they wont becasue they will not have access to the resources especially if they are bartering for goods and services. they may not be able to create enouugh value to also feed the people in prison. if we live in an imperfect world then every economic system will be soem form of distopia.if things are given away for free then they don't have to work. If the cost of geting some is you have to give something then by definition it is not free.