azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Market socialism is an attempt by a Soviet-style economy to introduce market elements into its economic system to improve economic growth. It was first attempted during the 1920s in the Soviet Union as NEP, or the New Economic Policy, but soon abandoned. Later, elements of "market socialism" were introduced in Hungary (where it was nicknamed "goulash socialism"), Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia (see Titoism) in the 1970s and 1980s. It is also the system introduced in the People's Republic of China by Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s and has evolved into what some economists, outside of China, would argue is modern Chinese capitalism. Modern Vietnam and Laos also describe themselves as market socialist systems. The Soviet Union attempted to introduce a market socialist system with its perestroika reforms under Mikhael Gorbachev prior to the collapse of the USSR in 1991. Historically, market socialist systems attempt to retain government ownership of the "commanding heights of the economy" such as heavy industry, energy, and infrastructure, while introducing decentralised decision making and giving local managers more freedom to make decisions and respond to market demands. Market socialist systems also allow private ownership and entrepreneurship in the service and other secondary economic sectors. The market is allowed to determine prices for consumer goods and agricultural products and farmers and sometimes other producers are allowed to sell all or some of their products on the open market and keep some or all of the profit as an incentive to increased and improved production. However, the Chinese experience with market socialism has led to another situation.Source: http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Market_socialism
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

On Medicare, are you saying that over 90% of Canadians are incorrect for loving their free health-care system?
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

On Medicare, are you saying that over 90% of Canadians are incorrect for loving their free health-care system?Whether you enjoy it or not, it is theft. :/
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Not unless it infringes on the economic rights of others. (Which they usually do)The only economic rights are the right to own property, and the right to the mutually voluntary trade of that property.Without theft or fraud, how can these rights be infringed upon?When you work, you are always having the value of your work stolen from you. You, by essential right should maintain the value of your work as you see fit, meaning you charge what you want to charge for your work, as you see fair. In a workplace, for your employer to make a profit, you're contribution MUST be undervalued.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

And on Sweden, I would rather have slightly less income, then pay a 50 000 dollar medical bill.fucking a man. fucking a.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

This mises.org is essentially "how to be a libertarian by taking all of these online courses and giving some Austrian economist all of your money."
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

No, it is a libertarian think tank centered around classical liberal political and economic philosophy.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

"Relative to household in the United States, Swedish family income is considerably less. In fact, the study concludes, average income in Sweden is less than average income for black Americans, which comprise the lowest-income socioeconomic group in this country."http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888932381684$6,000 United States dollars difference at current prices and current Purchasing power parity for 2007-2008. Wow, that's considerable
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

and attempt to use debt as a means to control the population.Interest rates are manipulated (by government) in the US to encourage debt. It is part of the Keynesian system, which bears no relation to capitalism.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

The goal of socialism is beautiful and poetic.The effect of socialism is poverty.How is there poverty when no one has more than another? Poverty is a relative term.The goal of capitalism is cold and calculating.The effect of capitalism is a higher standard of living for everyone in the society.Take a walk down Younge St. and say that to the homeless, you'll find rather quickly that you are very, very wrong.Capitalism makes a general rule of one of our most base- personal greed.Capitalism has each of us competing to fulfil the needs of our fellow man. Whoever does this the best, prospers the most.Yes, Capitalism has man competing. But no, it is NOT to fulfill the needs of fellow man. It is to preserve your own status in the society. That is greed, do not confuse it for love. No matter how you rationalize it, if you have more than a fellow man, you are not holding him as your equal. All men were created equal, so the old adage goes. To believe that any other man is incapable of being your equal is to be the very evil your previous logic professes to defend against.Capitalism is "I"Socialism is "WE"No matter how you cut the cake, that's the way it is.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

You present no facts to back this up. I live in Canada, a fairly socialized country. And let me tell you America looks like Honduras to us right now. Germany, Sweden, and other prospering European nations agree. Bet Greece wishes it had been paying taxes right now. Capitalism is a race to the bottom. Who can pay as little to have something done so we all make nothing.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I disagree that capitalism raises the standard of living of everyone. Capitalist try to cut the wages of their workers to increase their profits. Capitalists strive for slavery and allow people to die to increase their profits. Capitalists will pollute our environment to make a profit. They will destroy our sources of water. There isn't anything they won't do to increase their profits. Our culture believes that we should take care of the disadvantaged but the capitalists don't agree. They have and will exploit anything to make a buck.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I pretty much agree with every point you made. What scares me is the continuing presence of free-market ideology (read extreme capitalism) in academia. Extreme ideologies are always bad. always.With that said. The goal of socialism is beautiful and poetic. The goal of capitalism is cold and calculating. Social attempts to harness our better, more moral instincts- love of our fellow man. Capitalism makes a general rule of one of our most base- personal greed. For that reason, I choose socialism.This is excellently put. Capitalism nurtures and stimulates the irrational, emotional side of the brain. The part which gets excited when you receive a pay cheque. Socialism is an attempt to rationalise society.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

This is excellently put.See what I mean. You act agreeable to the normies to hide the fact that you are a radical and a douche bag, that way it is easier to get away with being a douche bag to everyone else and whether they deserve it or not they are the outliers and you are the Normal Nom who sides with all the Average Als out there.Capitalism nurtures and stimulates the irrational, emotional side of the brain.The post you supposedly agreed with called capitalism cold and calculating, not emotional and irrational.Socialism is an attempt to rationalise society.No it's not, socialism is an attempt to do the impossible and make everyone equal. The only system which inherently values the rational is Technocracy. Socialism values equality above all which is inherently irrational because it is an unrealistic goal.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

The post you supposedly agreed with called capitalism cold and calculating, not emotional and irrational.That is because the post I agreed with was describing capitalism and I was describing the brain.Fuck off. Loser.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Literally everyone can see why this response is stupid given the proper context. You are just so pathetic.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Socialism has failed repeatedly, yet you fully expect some form of it will need to be adopted at some point. Basically, the only way humans can function in social cooperation is through act of violence and the threat of violence, this is what socialism is.As for the few to lord over the many, history has shown government was the clear culprit.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

You're not very good at actually reading arguments. You cling to a point in your head and just kind of go back to your playbook from there.I'm pretty clear that something in human nature would need to change in order for socialism to work, and that humans aren't there yet. We are headed there though. At some point, 10,000 years, 100,000 years, a blink of the eye in terms of this planets existence, we should get to the point where socialism can work without violence.And at that point it is more beneficial than capitalism...And what's with these fucking downvotes douche?
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Actually, I did read the whole argument as my argument still stands, socialism will always fail regardless of the weak correlation between socialism and evolution. I will concede socialism working if everyone shared ONE BRAIN, but this will also never happen.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

How has Capitalism fared in Latin America? South America? Africa? It has failed.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

That is a laughable. You mean more like crony capitalism or fascist capitalism fared in Latin America, South America and Africa.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Capitalism is still Capitalism, and I'm sure those who suffer in those regions do not find it laughable.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

What you are calling capitalism is interventionism, corporatism, and rent-seeking.---------------------Capitalism does not involve a private central bank setting interest rates.Capitalism does not involve a private central bank adjusting the money supply.Capitalism does not involve a system of fiat currency that requires legal tender laws to make people use it.Capitalism does not involve protection for lenders, such as commercial bank bailouts.Capitalism does not involve protections for investors, such as FDIC deposit insurance or investment firm bailouts.Capitalism does not involve a government responsible for spending 40% of the nations GDP.Capitalism does not involve massive amounts of regulations on business.Capitalism does not involve government subsidies to certain industries.Capitalism does not involve government contracts with corporations.Capitalism does not involve using tax payer dollars to clean up private corporate disasters.Capitalism does not involve government buying up the majority of resource rich land, then leasing that land out to favored corporations, such as major oil producers and mining corporations.Capitalism does not involve restrictions on private property owners being able to harvest resources from the land they own.Capitalism does not involve tax payer backed mortgage firms.Capitalism does not involve a massive military industrial complex that makes all of its profits from tax dollars, unwillingly taken from the public.Capitalism does not involve government seizing private property through eminent domain and then handing that land to private developers.Capitalism does not involve government creating jobs.Capitalism does not involve taxes on money (real money, such as gold and silver).Capitalism does not involve corporate lobbying for government contracts, kickbacks, tax breaks, subsidies, favorable regulations, regulations that hinder competition, regulations that hinder startups from competing, or any other government involvement in industry.Capitalism does not involve forcible redistribution of wealth.Capitalism does not involve a heavy progressive income tax on people's labor.------------------What does capitalism involve?Protection of private property rights, where a person can use their property as they see fit.Protection of private property rights, where a person gets to keep what they produce (money).Protection of private contracts, where people are free to negotiate voluntary contracts with each other and have the courts uphold those contracts.Free markets, where people can voluntarily exchange goods and services with each other as they see fit.Protection of money's value, where those who counterfeit and artificially inflate the money supply are charged with a crime, rather than be rewarded with profits.-------“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”-Benito Mussolini, author of The Doctrine of Fascism, Italian Fascist Dictator (Duce) 1943 – 1945
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

So I gather that you are not calling the US Capitalist. I will accept that. However, what about all the other failed countries which have Capitalist systems. These countries do not have some of the things that you listed.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Show me a country where a capitalist system failed, and I will show you the government interference (not part of capitalism) that caused it.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I could list several countries, but you will attempt to argue that Capitalists had no influence whatsoever in the governments.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

List them then. Even if he could argue that Capitalists had no influence whatsoever in the governments, it does not matter. This is a debate. You dispute him and he disputes you.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Show me a country where a capitalist system failed, and I will show you the government interference (not part of capitalism) that caused it.That's ridiculous. The same could be said of any system in the world which has ever existed. Nazism? Great idea, but Hitler screwed it all up. Imperialism? Great for the economy, but the Roman government overreached. Communism? Would have been awesome if it weren't for Stalin.You're asking someone a question while simultaneously trying to give yourself carte blanche to reject their answer. That's a clear logical fallacy.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

It is laughable that you compared fascist capitalism to free market capitalism as if they are the same, so then communist socialism is the same as democratic socialism. Time to get a clue.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Capitalism always decays. Socialism does not. Once again, I bet the people suffering under various regimes in Africa and Latin America would not find that laughable.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Despite government intervention, America witnessed the greatest growth in wealth in the history of mankind because of capital markets. Socialism only decays, every single socialist nation has either failed or failing.Regimes are not capitalism, these are usually referred to as dictorial.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Is Vietnam failing? Is Cuba? Was the SFR Yugoslavia a failure? Is Finland a failure? Is Sweden a Failure? Socialism is not decay, Socialism is growth.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Vietnam and Cuba are some of poorest countries in the world. Finland, Sweden are not socialist countries, they are mixed economies, which means they have capital markets.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Sweden and Finland have had Socialist majorities in their Parliaments. Please do not make un-supported claims. Also, what would happen if Vietnam became Capitalist? I do not want to think of the result. And on Cuba, do you not realize that it is a Latin American success story? What has Capitalism done to other countries in the region? It has impoverished them! Cuba has one of the best Health care systems in the world, they complete in the Olympics and win medals, and they have a great education system.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

The Socialists in Finland and Sweden and not the same as the Socialists in Cuba or Vietnam. The are more like Bernie Sanders from Connecticut.Do you live in Vietnam or Cuba because if you don't, according to yourself, you are missing out on the greatest opportunity to live in starvation.Those Latin American countries don't have real capitalism, it is more like corporatism where only the politically connected are wealthy.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Cuba has a higher standard of living than any other Latin American country. Though, it could be better.Those Latin American countries don't have real capitalism, it is more like corporatism where only the politically connected are wealthy.Then care to name one capitalist country?
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

United States was the closest true capitalist country until the turn of the 20th Century. It has the highest standard of living in the world though government intervention is consuming our wealth through high taxation, paper money and regulatory bureaucracy.If socialism is superior to capitalism, why is Cuba not have the highest standard of living in the world?
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

If socialism is superior to capitalism, why is Cuba not have the highest standard of living in the world?Why does Cuba have the highest standard of living in Latin America?Remember, the brutal blockade by the US.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Why does Cuba have the highest standard of living in Latin America?This does not answer the question that our friend asked you. If socialism is superior to capitalism, why is Cuba not have the highest standard of living in the world?You have pretty much made it clear what the answer to this question is. Or are you going to answer it for me? Can you even answer it? So far you have proven that you can't. But you can prove me wrong.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

It has the highest standard of living in the worldNo it doesn't. This is a myth. Stalin used to say the exact same things to the Soviets.https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings bycountry.jsp
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Look at all the countries in Latin America, South America, Africa and Asia that adopted socialism that failed horribly. There are too many to count. But if you would like a list I will be happy to oblige.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Name one. I will demonstrate why corruption, or outside influence caused its downfall.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Look at all the countries in Latin America, South America, Africa and Asia that adopted socialism that failed horribly.They didn't fail. The United States blockaded them and spammed them with economic sanctions for being socialist. That isn't the same thing.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Most African nations these days either are in complete,chaos or are following some form of a socialist model do your research
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Ideally socialism would be able to guarantee living standards which promote creativity, invention, and the progression of humanity. With basic needs meant individuals would be able to contribute to society according to their strengths instead of being forced to contribute according to survival.Ideally, but not in reality.Capitalism after only a couple of generations at its best only can act as a replacement for darwin-type survival, where instead of survival depending on speed, strength, and brains, it depends on your parents' means, and if they pass money and property down to you.Actually no, it does not depend on your parent's means. In a capitalist society, if you work hard, you will get paid well. Whether you parents pass things down to you or not, you can either become poor (by making bad life choices), Middle Class (by making good life choices but not necessarily wanting to go the distance to get rich), or rich (by making good life choices and going the extra mile to climb up the ranks and get paid more and more money as you go). I can list multiple examples of people who grew up poor but became rich:1. Guy Laliberté founded Cirque du Soleil2. Alan Gerry kickstarted a TV network that went on to become Cablevision3. Kenny Troutt the founder of Excel Communications4. Mohed Altrad Montpellier rugby club president and Entrepreneur of the Year5. Howard Schultz Starbucks founderThe list could keep going on. But I don't need any more examples, I have proven my point.These are sort of the extreme conclusions of each theory.I know that, and still, it can be disputable.So ideally, socialism is a better system for humanity, and I fully expect some form of it will need to be adopted at some point in our evolution.Our brains aren't there yet though.Our brains will never get there because nobody is and will ever be perfect.We are too greedy, lazy, and corruptible for a socialist society to last.We seem to do best when we use the competitive nature of capitalism, with social strategies that ensure the rich are not able to stifle all opportunity for the rest of humanity through the influence that comes from money.I totally agree. This is why socialist societies fail all over the world.We seem to do best when we use the competitive nature of capitalism, with social strategies that ensure the rich are not able to stifle all opportunity for the rest of humanity through the influence that comes from money.I am going to again agree with this statement.We need balance in all things at this point. Money against the power of representation, rights against special interests, media against government, social economic provisions against capitalist incentive; all butting heads to ensure an extreme doesn't allow for the few to lord over the many--which has been the case through most of human history, and still is for the majority of humans outside of westernized societies, by the way.So you mean like each thing has a check so that there are no loopholes in anything?
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Ideally, but not in reality.Feudalists said exactly the same before society moved to capitalism. Monarchists said the same before society moved to feudalism. It is a fallacy to claim something doesn't work if the reason it doesn't work is that the status quo is entrenched in one particular way of life. Take a team of 11 soccer players and give them each a stick. Throw a ball in there. Does hockey now not work "in reality"?if you work hard, you will get paid well.Another pernicious myth. My old man got up at 5 am every morning for his entire life and climbed up poles all day to fix telephone lines. Now he lives off a state pension.or rich (by making good life choices and going the extra mile to climb up the ranks and get paid more and more money as you go).People do not get rich by working hard. This is the most damaging and false myth about capitalism. They get rich by taking advantage of the people who are working hard.