Capitalism benefits an economy

I'm glad my opponent is liking this debate. I thank him as well. I will start off by given some more arguements against capitaism while discussing my opponents claims. On to the debate.. I think that Capitalism, by its' unnatural constraint on the free flow of wealth, decreases the quality of life for most, while only increasing it for the few. Does capitalism actually improve any of these things? Every human necessity from food to health care is taxed to the limit by profit-mongers, a process that taints and corrupts even the best of intentions. Around the world today poor people sit idle and hungry, waiting for the promised miracle of industrialization to deliver them jobs manufacturing useless consumer goods for export, while their farms and fields go to waste. Is there no one driving? My opponent emphasized that too much government restriction ends up being a horrible outcome because they become more and more corrupt through kleptocracy. Though I agree that too much governmental control is more harm than good, though capitalism also gives much restrcition to the less fortionate. Consider the structure of our capitalist society. People are conditioned to be consumers from the earliest. They are given a minimal education -- learning just enough Math to work for someone else, and just enough English to know what consumer items to spend their paychecks on. Consumerism does not represent the highest ideals of mankind, but the lowest common denominator of man's most base desires and outlets of personal despair, disappointment, or frustration. The economics of consumer-based corporations are unbalanced equations that ignore the most vital aspects of both mathematics and human existence. The tobacco industry kills millions but denies their product is responsible and spends a fortune feigning innocence and garnering political influence to protect them from their disparate and disorganized victims. The alcohol industry kills as many or more and does untold damage to families, but none of their balance sheets mention or account for the cost their products incur to society. It is only deceit and irresponsibility that keeps many of them in the markets. Can a barter economy work, that is, one that ran on pure credit? The idea was to assemble working people of diverse skills such that anything anyone needed could be provided by someone else. Credits would be defined for the value of work or goods, whether carpentry, milk, health care, tailored goods, or whatever. Defining the values would not be diffficult, after all, we do this with dollars already, except that instead of receiving flat rates they would receive true value. In such a system taxes could not be collected in terms of money, but only in terms of credit dollars towards human labor. Nor could interest be collected, since this also represents profit. The capitalisation of wealth, which holds human labor in suspension and diverts it to the whims of a few, rather than the needs of the many, would not be facilitated. Obviously, if every company that manufactured essential goods (i.e. food, housing, health care, etc) increased production to either the maximum or the limit of consumer need, the benefits would be synergistic and possibility of eliminating poverty comes into focus. Without poverty, crime drops to natural levels, whatever those may be. Anticapitalism can be implemented in at least three ways and to varying degrees. It can be implemented at a personal level, at a business level, and community-wide. Practicing anticapitalism at a personal level means abandoning the paradigm of profit, eliminating expenses on nonessentials, and minimizing expenses on purchased essentials. It can mean accepting poverty but it maximizes free time. The time is spent bettering one's living environment, health, and education. It is necessary for one to become educated regarding economic matters so as to understand the difference between nonessentials and essentials, and the difference between being paid for honest labor on essentials and wasted labor on nonessentials funded by profit motives alone. Personal anticapitalism can be the most difficult to implement due to the lack of economic synergy and the existing system. Anticapitalism can be implemented in a business environment. Thee are many precedents for profitless businesses and many examples of successes and failures. Although such businesses may be non-profit, they rarely, if ever, implement true anticapitalist economics. Many are dependent on donations or outside funding sources, and those that are economically self-sustaining are often interwoven into an fabric of economic exploitation by other corporations. A business intent on going nonprofit can accomplish this within the existing corporate environment easily, especially if it already operates at or near break-even and maintains some nominal profit. Prices are cut to increase sales volume. Advertising is eliminated, as is wasteful packaging. Any continuing profits are reallocated towards expansion. Increasing quality is essential to expanding sales and this becomes the focus of worker's continuing efforts. The pay scales must be adjusted such that the distribution of salaries forms a normal bell curve with about three standard deviations. This may mean the chairman and top executives must reduce their salaries to bring them into line with employees, but it may also mean a pay raise for employees. In the long run, as volume increases, the executives salaries may even surpass their original levels. Obviously, a company needs to own itself so that all involved are actualy working. A company that is not self-owned needs to buy out absentee owners and investors, and this may reqire a period of operation during which the stock is bought back using company profits. Financing may also come from an employee ownership program, and these kinds of programs have worked in the past. Profit is the icon of the modern economic world, leaving the quality of life a casualty of mindless competition. It's time for the US, as de facto leader of the modern world, to consider abandoning capitalism and taking the first step towards a future where the entire human race, not just the privileged minority, could be wealthy enough to solve our more important problems. Perhaps until all diseases, social and otherwise, are cured, this should remain a non-profit world. Since most of us are bonded into non-profit employment anyway, the only differences we'd notice would be of the profound kind. I think I have shown that capitalism can be avoided and is in fact a hinderance in society. Thanks and I send it back to Pro. http://www.aerobiologicalengineering.com...