Capitalism (Pro) vs Socialism (Con)

Democratic Socialism"s correlation with a country"s morale is virtually nonexistent. The situation between the Nordic countries and the rest of the world is very different. The Nordic countries are countries with the most homogeneous population with a CAPITALIST country paying for their entire defense budget. An important part of the answer is that members of small, homogeneous societies are much more willing to bear the burden of supporting their fellow citizens than members of large, diverse ones. I have listed all the countries with Democratic Socialists as their current governing party. You have not addressed the obviously "large", "massive" and "growing" economies such as the Philippines, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Bolivia, Greece, Peru, Venezuela, Brazil, Portugal, and Armenia that I have mentioned in the previous round. My opponent then goes on and handpicks the socialist country of Norway and how it has a higher gdp per capita. I have also decided to handpick the capitalist country of Switzerland to counter his example. United States " GDP per capita (current US$) $56,115.72 USD (2015) Sweden " GDP per capita (current US$) $50,579.67 USD (2015) Switzerland " GDP per capita (current US$) $80,945.08 USD (2015) Norway " GDP per capita (current US$) $74,400.37 USD (2015) My opponent then goes on about how there is massive income and wealth inequality for people who work long hours. There are two main problems with this point. Income is determined by your line of work and level of production in society. There is a reason why hobos do not earn billions of dollars and a reason why Bill Gates does not earn minimum wage. Capitalism helps everyone in society but just helps some people more than others. Some people in a capitalist society will become very efficient workers and will earn a reasonably high income but some people may become successful entrepreneurs and earn much more. Capitalism rewards risk and provides a strong incentive for everyone. No one just finds all this money, life is about cause and effect and people like you can"t just ignore half of the story. Hard work will get you far in life but ingenuity simply gets you much farther. The low-income families in the USA are living infinitely better lives than the people in DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST Bolivia for this reason. I am not arguing that Capitalism is perfect in every sense but, it is simply the best economic system that we have today. The second problem is that you treat inequality and inequity as the same thing. Why is income inequality bad and what point would you consider the gap to be beneficial to society. If you argue for no gap, then that is not Democratic Socialism but COMMUNISM. If you do argue for a gap, then you are completely destroying your entire argument. Inequality will always be in life because no one is born identical with identical environmental parameters. I am 5"10 so, I will likely never be able to play pro-basketball. Everyone is born differently and in different situations and there will always be a gap despite the government"s interference. We can see the USSR"s solution to the problem in order to close such a gap is by making everyone poor. Democratic Socialism is terrible as it"s regulations and high tax rates against entrepreneurs and wealthy people will discourage any economic growth. My opponent forgets that while most jobs are filled up by the working class, it is the capitalists that make them. Capitalists simply can"t improve society with the government "changing their incomes". The recent election of 2016 completely destroys your entire argument. "The elites and establishment pick, not the people (Electoral College). Party leaders (Debbie Wasserman Schultz) can be biased in favor of the establishment candidate, and super PACs allow the 1% to contribute unfairly and disproportionately.". We have seen nearly every major news network, politicians, Party leaders and wealthy elites endorsing everyone BUT Donald Trump. Trump is hated by the establishment Republicans and Democrats but still managed to come out on top because our political system is still controlled by the people. Capitalism is about the individual unlike the hive-mindset behind Socialism. While money does a play in part in elections it is worth noting that Hillary Clinton spent 1.4 Billion dollars while the victorious Donald Trump only spent 957.6 Million dollars. This is clear proof that money is not the deciding force behind democratic elections despite being in a capitalist society. We don"t need Socialism to prevent your absurd claim of governmental corruption. My opponent then goes on how Collectivism ought to be preferred to individualism. Obviously, he has never heard of history and how Collectivism never works. The Purges (1.2 million), Soviet caused famine in Volga (5 million), Great Leap Forward (600 million) were all caused in the name of collectivization. You constantly make unproven claims against Capitalism but where is your solution? How can Democratic Socialism prevent this? You have proven no points about how Democratic Socialism can help alleviate these "symptoms". My opponent then goes on and tries to link pollution and Capitalism again for some reason? ("capitalism allows bias and corruption so a handful of people profit from pollution") My opponent goes on to explain why the UK is currently no longer socialist but does not recognize that it actually helps reinforce my argument. The UK is abandoning Democratic Socialism despite decades of implementation. We see many other European countries starting to elect more conservative leaders this past decade for a reason. SOCIALISM IS FAILING!!! If your claims about the supposed "wonders" of Democratic Socialism are factually correct then, we would not have seen Brexit and we would not see all these conservative leaders gaining control. Taxation is coercion whether you like it or not and people simply don"t like paying 60% of their income to the government. Sure, many socialist countries "provide" free healthcare but, it simply isn"t effective without any incentive for any people to become healthcare workers. That is why we see many Canadians going to USA"s hospitals when they need a medical procedure done. "2 socialist countries have higher GDPs per capita than the US" Sir, there are at least 50 current pseudo-Democratic socialist countries in the world. Having just two countries that barely beat the USA in terms of GDP per capita is downright pitiful. You then go on to bring up Bush in order to justify Obama"s idiotic economic policies. Bush is a crony-capitalist and has little to do with a free market. In fact, Bush is more of a Democratic socialist if anything. He believed in governmental interference and regulations to help the economy. That is very un-capitalist like thinking. Bernie Sanders despite being the Senator for Vermont never really increased jobs. While Reagan did increase debt, he did provide a massive increase in jobs and boosted the economy. Obama"s debt is more than EVERY SINGLE OTHER US PRESIDENT COMBINED with a pitiful increase in the economy and jobs! democratic socialism is not a necessity but a damaging force which hinders growth. Sources https://www.washingtonpost.com... https://thefreedonian.wordpress.com... http://data.worldbank.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... http://grammarist.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... http://patriotupdate.com... https://www.cato.org... https://mises.org... http://thefederalist.com...