Debate: Capitalism or Socialism
Side: Socialism

Our country's corporatism does not allow for freedom. The freedom isn't taken away by the government, the freedom is taken away by the corporations... the rich people themselves.When the government takes all your money to support people...Moochers wouldn't exist without the rich and their corporations taking what they don't need. Our system allows the extremely rich to exist, and therefore is allows the extremely poor to exist.People enslave themselves...The government naively allows our system to exist the way it is, meaning that both the government and the people allow people to be enslaved. But ultimately, WHY ARE YOU ACTING LIKE SLAVERY IS GOOD FOR ANY REASON?We have the choice of what jobs we want to do...No we don't... not in all cases. If you knew what giant corporations have done to some small communities, you'd see that you are incorrect.The government HAS NO RIGHT...Well, since the poor are poor because of the rich, I see it's only fair that the wealth of the rich be redistributed to the poor. There is a certain threshold of wealth in which you will never spend another sent of money for the rest of you and your family's life. Once the rich reach this threshold of wealth, all of their remaining wealth should be given to people who need it. If they don't give it to them and they never use this excess money, they are just hording money that could be used to help the economy and the needy. If you firmly believe that the rich deserve to horde money that they will never use, especially since they had to ruin the lives of hundreds of people to obtain it, then I'm sorry to say that such a belief is fascist and immoral.Donations are nice, but the problem is that the rich corporate cats that decide go past the wealth threshold do so because they are greedy and glutenous and want more of what they don't need. If they want to take what they don't need and make people suffer, I see no reason why the government can't enact justice and reallocate these horded funds back to the poor people they raped it from in the first place.So, why SHOULDN'T the government come to the aid of people who need it? I see it only logical, since it's their job to make us happy and keep us safe.You look at our economic crisis today...Our current (actually previous) crisis was caused by a war we shouldn't have fought and couldn't pay for, but was also caused by giant corporations like ENRON molesting the stock market and general market with their risks and illegal advantages.Regulations. Regulations. Regulations...What are you talking about? Corporations still control our entire economy. The government still has too little a role in it, just short of stopping corporations from outright murdering each other with hit men and security forces. I don't know what makes you think the government is controlling the market even a little, especially considering all of the obvious bribes that have been made to Congress in the past 11 years. The little things Obama has done for the market during his term hasn't done scant shit in comparison to the power giant corporations still have over it. The only way the government would have control would be if Obama has declared war against corporatism, which he won't, because he's naive, unfortunately.Obama bailed out the car companies because if he hadn't, WE WOULD HAVE BECOME A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY! I'm not surprised you said that though; it had a denseness to it that was unmistakably you.And look at our failing public, government controlled schools...You can't have your cake and eat it to. We have public and a private school program so that parents have the freedom to choose to have their children to compete by sending them to a public school. This way, parents can have their children either get the normal treatment of a public school, or they can spend more money and take the risk of putting their children forward in the job market. That's capitalist enough.If we have a universal voucher system, nothing will be solved whatsoever. Either one, all private schools will become the new public schools, or two, public schools will tighten the prerequisites for attending them and stop more people from going to them. Either way, nothing will be accomplished. If you want to improve education, improve all of the public schools. The purpose of private schools is nonexistence if everyone had the ability to attend them.I'm not going to reply to the rest of your last paragraph, because it's all complete cockery. Anyone who believes that the president has a socialist agenda is not worth finishing responding to. Have fun in your fantasy world for me, okay? I'll enjoy the day some Democrat, Obama or not, performs yet another stupendous feat akin to getting us out of the Great Depression. You brainwashed fascist.