Capitalism Is The Greatest Economic Ideal

1. I understand what my topic says, and I admit that it wasn't the best choice of words. But you're basing your argument on my bad semantics. If I had simply put "Capitalism is the Best Economic Policy In Use," then at the very least, your first point is invalid. In other words, you shouldn't try to win a debate because of (or lack of) semantics. 2. Although your second point sounds nice, it isn't very practical. No matter what you do, it is impossible to make everyone "help society." Even if we ignore the real world examples that prove this to be wrong, it's just human nature. Do you honestly expect every single person, or even the group of people in unnationalized industries, to work for the greater good? It's unreasonable and honestly unfair. It's unfair to force someone to work long and hard for someone else who may not be willing to work at all. "In a communism [sic] children would grow up with success = help society...." Again, how do would you manage to go about brain washing all children into the mindset of extreme selflessness? People like to prosper from their own success; not to be held back by forced "charity." Can we agree that when you take from someone without asking, it's stealing? That is what you are proposing: legal stealing. People deserve to keep the fruits of their work. "Stop and think for a minute about everything society has told you about growing up and how this has effected your life. 'Go to school' 'Earn a degree' 'Get rich' "Support your family.'" How are any of those things bad? Is it bad to want to better your life by going to school, getting a degree, getting rich, and supporting a family? These things should be encouraged. And, again, isn't it just human nature to want to be wealthy. It's not necessarily greed, it's just wanting to ensure a bright future for yourself, and your loved ones. Society didn't tell me that Santa Clause wasn't real, my logic did. And my logic is what tells my that Communism is an awful ideology that should never be practiced. But I'm not the only one. Ask almost any civilian of a Communist country and odds are that they would wish to live in a place where they can try to better their situation, without any interference from the government. I use this example because I think it demonstrates my point very well: Merriam-Webster defines "law" as "the action of laws considered as a means of redressing wrongs." I think we can substitute "redressing wrongs" with "upholding justice." This is the sole purpose of the law. It's not there to over see business, it's not there to make sure that your paychecks are taken and given to complete strangers. It's there to make sure that everyone is given the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Communism interferes with this. But don't confuse this legal stealing you talk about with taxes. When we are taxed, we are receiving things in return, like police, schools, mail, and even senators and congressmen. When a Communist government takes from me, they are giving it to the people I don't even know. My living standard goes down so someone else's can go up. Is it my responsibility to make sure they have money? No. Sure, it's sad, but people should give to charities because they want to, they shouldn't be forced. No government has the right to take from me what doesn't belong to them. In conclusion, you can't say that Communism will produce more innovative products. What will their motivation be? And you can't say "because they want to help society." For most people, they don't care about other people, and that won't change with Communism. Money is a big motivator, and the lack of it pushes people to think beyond what they thought possible. This is how new inventions are born. 3. "I'm saying a Communism because of its efficiency can create products to sell on a global market that would be unbeatable by any other nation." I already proved in point two that a Communist nation wouldn't have innovative products that would sell well in a global market. So how can you say that a Communist nation would be "unbeatable?" None of your previous arguments work. They are all based on the assumption that people won't mind being oppressed by a government that holds society back whenever it steals from them, as long as its for the "greater good." Now to pick apart your rebuttals: I never said that the US was purely Capitalist. I'm just saying, as far as other nations go, we are one of the closest to getting there. So the fact that the US is not purely Capitalist, or is slightly Socialist, doesn't hurt my contention at all. 1. Again, most of your arguments are based on my bad word choice. If I has used different words, you wouldn't have much to argue with. But I recognize that that is the topic, so I'll leave it to the voter to decide. 2. Well, lets go back to that first thing you said about the US. "The U.S is not a capitalism it is a minor selective socialism with very few nationalized industries and some subsidies." So, let's say that is true, that the US is Socialist. Isn't there unneeded death in America? And then just look at every other Communist nation. Isn't there unneeded death, and in some areas, mass murder? So, your idea that, in Communist, or even semi-Socialist countries, people don't die unnecessarily, is not valid as seen by the real world examples. And you can't say that those countries don't follow your definition, because you said your self that the US could be considered Socialist. You ask whether it is just for one man to live in wealth while one suffers in poverty. Well, you don't know what that poor man did to get in his situation. He could have been a huge junkie and wasted his whole life and money on drugs. I'm not saying all poor people are drug dealers, but it's not like every poor person got poor and they couldn't help it. This is one reason why I believe in Capitalism: because people should be held economically responsible for their actions. But wait, there's more! In Capitalism, everyone has an opportunity to work hard and get on the same level as the wealthy man you mentioned earlier. In Communism, there is no social mobility, and your have no opportunity to advance or better your situation. Also, it's unfair to take from someone to give to another. Like in the stories of Robin Hood, "I steal from the rich and give to the poor." Isn't that still stealing? There are other ways to make sure that everyone has food to eat without taking hard earned money from people. I understand what you mean by wanting to help other people and that's good. But it's not good to force people to give up their things for others. You should give to charity becuase you want to, not because your forced to. Another reason why I hate Communism is because my whole family is from Cuba. Their lives were ruined by Che/Castro and Communism. They ended up having to leave and (legally) moved to New York to start fresh. My grandpa did well for himself, and was able to send all four of his children to college and 2 kids to grad school. Now, my dad has done even better and we are living quite comfortably in a nice house, and I am going to a great Jesuit prep school. If that's not the American dream, I don't know what is. My point is is that I know first hand how awful Communism is and how great Capitalism is. They both have their downsides, but Capitalism allows for opportunity, while Communism holds people back. Why else do you think so many people immigrate here, and not to Communist nations? Communism causes chaos, violence, and oppression. Capitalism, while it may provide gross profits for rich executives, also gives EVERYONE the opportunity to make something with their lives. Everyone has an opportunity to start fresh and where you come from can't change that. You can't do that with Communism.