Debate: Capitalism vs. Democracy
Side: democracy

You argue your opinion on the drugs debate is "not based on some kind of personal experience". I argue that you cannot have a strong opinion (like yours is) without the personal experience it is based on.Whether drugs are illegal or not they would still, in some cases, destroy peoples lives! If the war on drugs was replaced by a treatment program, I think the treatment program should still be getting people to quit drugs and aim for eradication, not suggesting correct use...Each individual decides how they live their life but they structure their decisions on the society they live in. The individual has an effect on the society they live in, and the society they live in has an effect on them.If we give everyone complete freedom of choice each and every person will structure that choice on these new surroundings.Dear dear. You reduce my argument to extremes "but demanding that capitalism ether cure poverty or be stopped is kind of overboard". When did I do that? this whole discussion between us I have been open to the benefits of capitalism, but maintain that there should be a middle ground that involves regulation and democracy. Or a future where we figure out something that works better.In regards to your putting words into my mouth:Aids, there is now a 'Cure', it was in stem cell transplanting. You are wrong there. There is a phone cord that does not tangle up, its called a wireless phone. You are wrong there. And the problem of death is constantly being worked on, with life expectancy going up as a result. So maybe capitalism should NOT be regulated? This is why, last comment I questioned your use of the word "better" for new technology. Sure other words like faster, easier, user-friendly and so on can be used, but better?If it were not for regulation we would see clones of human beings around everywhere. Stem cell research would already be commonplace. Things like these need regulation to make sure they really are "better" before they are chucked out on the capitalist market. wireless technology is only a relatively new technological advance that solves the phone chord tangle. Is is a "better" advance? Do we know if it has no effects on us? I'm not saying it will, but what happens if in twenty years or so there is a crazy increase of cancer from it? Oh hopefully we will have cured cancer by then. With stem cell stuff. We will have cured death by then. But what about the effects of these? We already have a massive population in this world.Capitalism VS democracy. This is the debate. Above all the fuss and bother, I think that democracy is the winner. In a perfect world there would be equal opportunity for everyone and freedom of choice, and capitalism would mean that hard work meant reward. In our flawed world there is inequality, and no matter how free we allow choice to be, there will be most who simply have no opportunity to choose some options. Capitalism unfettered, I suggest, just increases inequality over time, as the ones with capital continue to capitalize on their position. The boom/bust way that capitalism works leaves a lot of rubbish in its wakeDemocracy in a perfect world would be everyone with an equal say on the decisions that effect their lives. In our flawed world we only really get to decide on the people that make the decisions that effect our lives, and there are influences that marginalize the equality of even this decision. The result is government making regulations that a majority of people don't want.I'm critical of both, but I think that in the real world, they need to work together to create a place for us to live where wealth is distributed a little more evenly. And if we had a choice of one or the other, I would choose Democracy.We have moved, as a human race, away from total reciprocity, through redistribution, and are currently at market exchange.What is wrong with reciprocity? We still use this in the informal economy. I think it is great. What is wrong with redistribution? Thats what our taxes go towards, and democracy should be making the redistribution of our taxes efficient and equitable. I think that is great. What is wrong with market exchange? This is the level that capitalism works on, and it means that resources are allocated to where they are used best. I think that is great too! They should all work together. What I don't think is great is when we think that we should kill off the others, well mostly just kill off redistribution, and rely simply on market exchange.REALLY what is going on here, Is you have your opinion and I have mine. While you do have some good arguments, you are coming from the (in my opinion rather selfish, egocentric, greedy, self-serving, head up butt) view that capitalism and freedom of choice should reign, because , I suggest, you can only see a positive future for yourself coming from these things. While I am white, male, from a upper middle class family, and can only see a positive future from these same things, I am critical of the lifespan of that future, with potential economic and ecologic disasters impending, and I wish to have kids. I hope that they can live in a world that they can be comfortable living with the empathetic ethical morals I will promote in them, and I hope that the world, through democracy and education, can come to their senses and realize how we are fucking each other around with our egocentric self-interest and competition, when we can be self-interested in our collective future, and competitive towards a sustainable future for the planet.