A system of true Capitalism is the most beneficial system for the world

This round, I rebut Con's case. I had to write this in about 15 minutes, so please excuse any errors... I'll start off by saying that the voters should stop reading here and VOTE PRO because even if Con's case is 100% true, he still hasn't made even a single drop in the bucket of his burden of proof, as he has not described any alternatives to capitalism. He can sit there and list off bad things about capitalism all day and it still will not show that it isn't the best system; as long as there are no alternatives to it, capitalism will still technically be the 'best', as far as this debate is concerned. Con has failed to fulfill his BoP at all, whereas I have at least provided a topical argument -- that capitalism is theoretically perfect (a claim validated with empirical evidence) and therefore necessarily the best. Thus, my BoP is more fulfilled than Con's, and it's too late for him to do anything about it. Vote Pro. Now onto the actual substance of his case (just for lolz) R1) Unsustainable Pro argues that because capitalism results in economic growth, the economy will eventually outgrow the carrying capacity of the planet and the world will end. However, this is a non-unique objection, as it can be applied to any economic system. No matter what the system, population growth is inevitable, and with that naturally comes economic expansion. As long as there is a finite amount of resources in existence, *all* systems are "unsustainable". R2) Environment I agree that, left unregulated, the activities of corporations will destroy the environment. However, note that the definition of capitalism does allow for some very minimal government intervention in order to protect people's rights. The environmental repercussions of corporate activities harm everyone in society through property damage and sometimes even death toll. Thus, the government is justified in regulating interactions with the environment on the basis that doing so preserves the rights of its citizens. Capitalism does not prohibit that sort of government intervention. R3) War Con is factually wrong, here -- historically, capitalism has *reduced* the amount of international military conflicts; this is a concept known as the "Capitalistic Peace", and it is widely accepted among economists and political scientists [1]. When a country becomes economically interdependent through capitalistic free trade (which almost all of the world's countries are, at this point), the welfare of the population (and, by extension, the government) becomes tied to the success and continuation of international trading relations. As a result, waging war becomes *extremely* costly (beyond just the military expenses and risk of losing) -- war results in the halting of trade and therefore incurs severe economic repercussions. One study which incorporated data from nearly every country in the world showed that for the average country in today's globally capitalistic world, the domestic economic costs of war actually *exceed* the military ones [2]. In that way, capitalism actually deters wars. C4) Immoral The flaw with this argument is very simple -- it assumes that morality exists. The wordings of the resolution to not give us any reason to assume that, as it is purely about the pragmatic benefits/harms of capitalism. Without first warranting belief in moral realism, this argument falls completely flat. Moreover, none of his bold claims in this section have sources supporting them (check the links for yourself), and therefore can be be dismissed off-hand. - The resolution remains affirmed. - [1] https://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.frbsf.org...