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

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"?Alright, that is a good point.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.It might depend on where you live. My grandfather did the same thing as your father and my grandfather lives a great middle-class life.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.That is not a myth. There are people who take advantage of you and that is definitely wrong, but not all people under a capitalist society are bad. An example is my uncle. He is second in command to the owner of a company that makes medical robots. He does not take advantage of anybody. He started off as an electrical engineer. He slowly got raises and promotions as he showed himself capable and slowly but surely he climbed his way up to be the manager of the managers. If my uncle took advantage of his employees that would be wrong in so many ways. He knows this and is going to work for the good of the company, not just for himself.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

That is not a myth. There are people who take advantage of you and that is definitely wrong, but not all people under a capitalist society are bad.Definitely not what I'm saying. I'm saying there is no direct relationship between working hard and getting rich. That is a myth.What people need to understand is that capitalism is a pyramid scheme. I don't mean figuratively. I mean that is literally what it is. The people at the bottom do the work and the people at the top profit from it. Passive income is how people get rich under capitalism. They start a business, employ people who work hard, and then they skim off the top.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

What people need to understand is that capitalism is a pyramid scheme. I don't mean figuratively. I mean that is literally what it is. The people at the bottom do the work and the people at the top profit from it. Passive income is how people get rich under capitalism. They start a business, employ people who work hard, and then they skim off the top.No. You act like the people at the top are just sitting there and not doing anything. They are the ones who are working hard. They are the ones who are making the decisions. They are the ones who are taking the risks. They are the ones who are making the sacrifices. They are the ones who started the company in the first place. Don't act like that's easy in any way because it isn't. You are just so ignorant that you don't even know what you are talking about.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I can list multiple examples of people who grew up poor but became rich:Thanks for the list. Can you spot what all these people have in common?None of them got rich by working a job.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Where's the "they're both fucking awful" option?Oh well, I suppose that socialism is preferred, but capitalism is more realistic in our society.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism is the best way for democracy to evolve.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

People need to realize that Socialism is not a dirty word. People also need to realize that the American govt. is not Socialist.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I don't realise why people in America always freak when they hear the word socialism or communism. You don't see Castro hiding under his bed covers at the thought of a possible new wave of capitalist ideology! Although I think his bed is where he's going to stay now..!
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Notice countries with a degree of socialism in their government tend to fair better than other countries? This is no coincidence, when society benefits as a whole, the country does better. This is good for everyone. This being said, socialism must be executed properly.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

What does a degree of socialism mean in their government? All government is socialism when referring to economically due to its redistribution.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

In essence, a degree of Socialism would mean influence by Socialists in Government.Also, all government speaking in economic terms, is not Socialism. What about a very small free market government? You are incorrectI strongly recommend that you read a bit of literature on Socialism, you may think differently.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

While I agree socialism is better, you're wrong. All government is technically socialism. It just depends on the degree. Now I have to go dispute something else too balance this out.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Read the definition of Socialism. All government is not always Socialism.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism definitely fares better for the society.Unlike animals human beings are characterized by the quality of labour. Animals perform repetitive, cyclic work which is compelled by natural instincts. But human labour begins with conceptualization and ends with execution and involves satisfaction and identification with your labour. But capitalism has alienated man from the activity of labour. This commodification of everything along with one's labour has made it impossible for humans to identify, satisfy, enjoy and associate with work. Thus capitalism has made humans detest labour. No wonder students no longer want to go to schools longing for holidays and workers hate to be confined to their cubicles.Also, capitalism leads to the inevitable domination of economic development over other forms of development. Eventually progress gets reduced to statistics and numbers. Thus human predicament fades in the background which is evident in the occupy wall street movements and low human rights concern in countries with apparent economic development.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Hmm well to much capitalism ends in corporatism. To much socialism ends in a totalitarian dictatorship. Whats option three?
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Capitalism with strong constitutional restrictions on government being able to treat market actors differently.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

what if its a socialism with a democracy? not all socialist governments have to be dictatorships, and the converse it true as well, not all capitalist governments have to be democracies. its just that people for some reason have it in their minds that communism = dictatorship which is absolutely not true because it contradicts definitions. i will say though that a capitalist government can very easily evolve into a corporate democracy which is a very bad form of government because it already has the backbone to stem this kind of government in the first place, however based on extensive research it would likely be difficult for a socialist democracy to evolve into a dictatorship in a relatively short time period.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

sorry accidently posted twice sorry accidently posted twice
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism is democracy in it's highest form. It is when democracy enters the workplace. With capitalism, democracy can never fully develop.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Yes because nothing says democracy like one party systems and the execution of political dissidents.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Please do not confuse Totalitarian Communism with Democratic Socialism.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Well don't confuse free-market capitalism with pure capitalism that what you guys are all thinking of that's what led to the monopoles. Yeah we got rid of that free market capitalism is much more small business friendly and doesn't allow for so much corporate backstabbing
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Well pleas don't confuse capitalism with corporatism then.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

A better title would be Growth vs. Decay.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

socialism is a very good system as it gets the best of both worlds. while not being extreme one way or the other. its a peoples system and its a business's system simultaneously without giving the business too much power to interfere unecessarily into peoples lives. when the people need support the can get it, while at the same time enjoy a modern and healthy lifestyle. look at Sweden, they enjoy one of the best health care systems in the world, esspecially considering its free, and they are some of the happiest people in the world as statistics would show. despite the high tax rate, because things are not inflated the people their can afford everything your average american can afford. a full on capitalism is all about business and people tend to forget about the actual people side of society. in a socialism both the people and economics are tended to without making anyone go into poverty, and if someone were to somehow take an economic tumble, they have very good support systems to get them back up and running in no time. there is so much more i could get into, but many of my comrades below me have listed all of the other necessary reasons why its a better system below me
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism and democracy go hand-in-hand. Socialism is bringing democracy into the work place. This is a positive thing.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Yes comrade firing squads and gulags are good for democracy. Don't question the government or think for yourself such things are bad for democracy. Democracy is where everyone who agrees with the communist party has the right to make there voices heard. Democracy is where Those who do not agree with the communist party have the right to chose between working for free until they die or dieing
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Your understanding of Socialism is truly archaic. If you are attempting to say that the USSR was Socialist, then you are incorrect. Socialism is Democracy. I highly suggest you read the information provided below.http://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Socialism
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

I see how they are different however that being said they are also very much the same in some key areas. Socialism while not as bad as communism still allows for WAY to much government intervention into business which always hurts the economy governments should break up monopolies and that's it. Also the workers have a say in management? Why? That would gunk up the system look at how long it takes congress to do any thing. Governments are supposed to be slow and gunked so they can't gain to much power and become oppressive whereas companies are supposed to be efficient and streamlined so they can get products out to the consumers faster and generate more profits because that's how an economy works kids. And lastly socialist programs are costly and as a result they ether end up putting us in debt (like we are now) or raise taxes astronomically (like Obamacare is going to) socialism is a nice idea but its just not ecmonomiclly viable sorry kiddies
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Governments are not supposed to be slow and gunked up, they are supposed to work quickly to protect the interests and livelihoods of their constituents.and by your ideas of workers not having a say in management, i can also infer that you are, at heart, a supporter of dictatorships. Your boss is a dictator if he/she does not allow the opinions of their employees.By the way,Don't compare business to congress. Business knows what it wants. Congress doesn't. It's like comparing adults to children. Adults know what they want, for the most part.Children don't even know what they NEED.Finally.Socialist programs are costly, yes, when put into the framework of a capitalist system.Socialist programs within a socialist system are essentially free. Education is free. NO longer will we have aspiring doctors crushed by the high costs of schoolingIn addition, no longer will we have doctors who became doctors for the paycheque. Since everyone is essentially paid the same, there is no drive besides the pure need to help.You work at what you love, not what you have to in order to survive
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, and a political philosophy advocating such a system.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Social democracy, historically a movement that aimed to build socialism through elections and parliamentary means.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Democratic socialism, a group of political movements that aim to build socialism from grassroots-level organizations through either reformist or revolutionary means
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Pure Capitalism would probably work, but it will always degenerate into a heightened class system. Socialism, however, ensures that the workers are not abused.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I wish people on this debate would know what they were talking about. We are talking about pure Socialism. Not totalitarian communism.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Much better, this way you don't get as many greedy bastards with millions stacked up in offshore accounts whilst the poor are freezing to death in the winter.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Apart from Jimmy Carr, I can forgive him :L
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

With all the talk of socialism meaning immediate tyranny, i feel i must ask:Has anyone here considered that perhaps the tyranny would be necessary to instill the ideas into FUTURE generations? Perhaps one or two generations would have to suffer to make the lives of the rest of humanity's existence better?Things always get worse before they get better. That's the way it always seems to work. Revolution is a dangerous and bloody, wholly unlikeable business, but the people who lead revolutions know that they are sacrificing their comfort to improve the lives of the people who come after them.I can see that the general consensus here is: Socialism is good, but unworkable currently.Cool.But, i can recall from my history texts that unfavorable conditions are the conditions under which the most famous and celebrated revolutions in history were enacted. The French Revolution, the American Revolution. the list goes on.Sure, our generation may never be able to take all the ideals of socialism into our societies, but the generation that has yet to be born can. Why? Because they can be taught differently. They can be taught that what they love to do matters. They can be taught to be kind, not unscrupulous. They can be taught to be responsible for the sake of their fellows rather than to be responsible for the sake of a continued paycheque.In short, that generation could be taught that PEOPLE matter more than MONEYIn that idea lies the basis of socialism and in that idea, lies a better tomorrow.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

It would seem to me that precisely the system that fails horribly in the hands of the human can be a standard for some species to avoid the lethal properties of the mutation of intelligence. They would be more likely live on to convert all matter in the universe into energy until the big rip.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

socialism helps people capitalism screws people and is only good for a small percentage of the people
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

A truly capitalistic system only benefits the wealthy, because the people who runs and have stakes in cooperations and political institutions only looks out for their own interests. We have seen numerous examples of this, where the latest, is a story that concluded that the richest people have billions after billions in foreign accounts on the grounds that they do not have to pay taxes from these amounts. However, the people who owns the billions, normally grew up in states where they benefitted from the community of the state. Therefore, it would be only natural that they gave something back to those, who helped them become succesful. This argument is also in concert with the argument about globalization. There is no such thing as being loyal and proud of ones own state anymore, as people see themselves as people of the world. This results in that everyone who have means, choose to entertain themselves internationally and as all scholars from studies such as International Studies and International Relations will inform you the international system is basically anarchic. People can do as they please, because there unfortunately is not a international regime or organization that have the power to enforce laws internationally yet. Therefore, I will not support capitalism, even though the idea is great if you perceive it nationally.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

The only plausible, even FAIR argument for capitalism is that everyone is given an equal chance to make money, it just depends on their effort on how much they pursue it. IF this was true, I'd completely agree.But as a wise man once said, "it's not."In today's world, there is no "equal opportunity."There is no "fairness," there is no equal start to finish.As a previous debater said, where you start in life, is where your parents left off. If your parents left off in a bad neighborhood, that's where you start. If they left off poor, with nothing to their names, that's where you're beginning. This, compared to someone being born into millions isn't equal opportunity to wealth. It's the opposite.Even the gov't programs to assist the "less fortunate" widen the gap. What is "fair" about government assistance? Affirmative action, for example. Does creating an easier entry for minorities send a message of fairness? If someone is hiring, and they have to resumes, exactly the same sitting in front of them, but there's only one difference:Subject A: Graduated from Berkley University on a full-ride academic scholarship.Subject B: Graduated from Berkley University on a full-ride Affirmative Action scholarship.The person would pick A. Any assistance makes the unfairness more unfair, and the handicap worse. No matter what the case, under current capitalist circumstances, the rich get richer over the poor getting poorer. That is why I agree with Albert Einstein is support of socialism, because capitalism is a fractured system.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

To be specific, I prefer democratic socialism. .
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

I'm not sure exactly how this works, but it just screams 'Murica. I support.I sound like every other American.. ever.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism and capitalism are not incompatible. Depending on what we define as capitalism and socialism the best political model is a mix like social democracy, social liberalismo, free market socialism, liberal socialism, the nordic model and so on.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

In lamens terms (assuming government corruption wasn't real):Capitalism is economic liberty. Socialism is economic security.  "Those willing to give up liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both" - Benjamin Franklin
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism does not give up economic liberty. It ensures it. In capitalism, the average working class man must sell himself to those who control the means of production. This is not economic liberty. In Socialism, the means of production are controlled with the workers in mind. This ensures that everyone prospers. "More socialism means more democracy, openness and collectivism in everyday life."-Mikhail Gorbachev
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Socialism does not give up economic liberty. It ensures it.When you are told who to give the check to for what service, you don't have economic liberty. When you can't choose between health care providers because the government monopolized it, you don't have economic liberty. When you are forced to fund government projects that you don't agree with or would rather have the market handle, you don't have economic liberty.In capitalism, the average working class man must sell himself to those who control the means of production. This is not economic liberty.You don't "Sell" yourself, you voluntarily agree to do a service in return for money and/or benefits. You have the right to start up your own business at any time or you could work for someone else's business and get some of their profit and climb your way higher in the company. Liberty =/= guaranteed happiness and job satisfactionLiberty = the ability of individuals to have control over their own actionsIn Socialism, the means of production are controlled with the workers in mind.Actually no, all means of production are owned by the government.This ensures that everyone prospers.No, it ensure the government will have a monopoly, you have to pay for their goods and services because 1. they are the only provider and 2. if you don't they can take legal action against you.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Socialism

Socialism does not give up economic liberty. This is because workers have direct control over the means of production. Thus, the workers control the capital. This is economic freedom.You don't "Sell" yourself, you voluntarily agree to do a service in return for money and/or benefits.This is simply not true. Their is no choice for many workers, especially those who reside in markets with limited employment. They must sell themselves to acquire capital.Actually no, all means of production are owned by the government This is also not true. In Socialism the workers control the means of production.No, it ensure the government will have a monopolyThe workers have a monopoly, not the government.
Debate: Socialism vs. Capitalism
Side: Capitalism

Socialism does not give up economic liberty. This is because workers have direct control over the means of production.The workers don't own the means of production, the government does. This is simply not true. Their is no choice for many workers, especially those who reside in markets with limited employment. They must sell themselves to acquire capital.Working for someone is not "selling" yourself. When someone does work for capital and both parties gave their consent, it is not selling themselves. Even if one party takes advantage of the other there is an extremely high chance that deal was is mutually beneficial and leaves both parties better of then they were before.The factory owners don't enslave them, they say "we are selling plastics, help us make the plastics and you can get a share of it, if you're not interested feel free to decline the offer."This is also not true. In Socialism the workers control the means of production.If you are referring to unions, then you are mistaken that is still Capitalism. In Capitalism the workers and unions get more power as the economy gets better, instead of producers just having to compete for the consumers they now have to compete for the labor.The workers have a monopoly, not the government.Actually no, in socialism the government has a monopoly.