CreateDebate


Debate Info

83
82
Nothing This is the problem/solution
Debate Score:165
Arguments:126
Total Votes:198
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Nothing (63)
 
 This is the problem/solution (56)

Debate Creator

StickinStone(649) pic



What is wrong with Capitalism?

Those who are for some economic structure other than capitalism have various arguments against capitalism. What are these arguments and how does another economic structure solve the presented problem?

Nothing

Side Score: 83
VS.

This is the problem/solution

Side Score: 82

Unless creating wealth and raising the standard of living is a problem, then I don't know anything.

Side: Nothing
Thewayitis(4071) Disputed
3 points

How does creating wealth for a few, raise the standard of living for the masses?

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

Henry Ford got incredibly wealthy off of his cars. Everyone is better off. Bill Gates got incredibly wealthy off his computer systems. Everyone is better off.

Wealth isn't created for these few, it is created by these few. They made it, and they keep what's theirs. And everyone is still better off.

Side: Nothing
1 point

COMPARE United States of America to any African country. This will prove that capitalism improves the standard of living for the masses.

Side: Nothing
2 points

Capitalism isn't the solution to all dilemmas in the world though. The kind of system capitalism is applied to is very important. For instance, the kind of system capitalism is applied to day is destroying the global ecosystem, destroying our resources while catastrophically heating the world up.

That doesn't mean that capitalism is essentially bad though. It just means that we can't say that everything capitalism is applied will result in betterment of the world.

Side: Nothing
1 point

Capitalism provided with free markets, sound money and personal freedom is the solution to all dilemmas in the world. The kind of capitalist markets today are not free, they are controlled and interfered by government causing cronyism.

Despite what kind of capitalism, resources are not destroyed, they are conserved. Capitalism only looks to use resources in the most efficient matter, so any destroying of resources is the result of government interference.

Side: This is the problem/solution
2 points

Nothing is wrong that isn't wrong with every economic system created by humans ever. It's not a utopian thing, but honestly we could have far worse.

Side: Nothing
2 points

There is nothing inherently wrong with capitalism. But capitalism requires a sort of referee in order for it to work well for everyone, work efficiently, and keep abuses to a minimum. A well regulated capitalism is a great thing. I don't mean to say that capitalism should be over-regulated (there should be some freedom), but there should be a balance to the system.

Side: Nothing

Nothing, it's only selfish little turds you have to worry about. Every System has it's faults, but Capitalism in my opinion is the best.

Side: Nothing
1 point

Extreme capitalism can be called heartless. ( if the people are really greedy) Extreme socialism = brainless.

Side: Nothing

Capitalism is essentially economic freedom. There is no need for it to be heartless. Is forced charity (with skimming) less heartless?

Side: Nothing
1 point

Without capitalism, I wouldn't be able to kick starving hobos without getting a ticket. Capitalism RULES,!

Side: Nothing
4 points

The problem is it allows people to be greedy, in fact every economic system has some problem, if any didn't we'd be using it.

I can't think of a solution to greed, because if someone as meager as myself could come up with a solution that would actually make an effect it surely would have been thought of before I was born, for as old as Capitalism is.

Side: This is the problem/solution
3 points

How can greedy even be defined? There is no quantifiable method to determine greed. If so, politicians are then just as greedy as businessmen. They want to steal to redistribute based on what they think is moral, yet they can't even see redistributing as immoral.

Correct, every economic system has problems, and all are rooted by government intervention whether it is autistic, binary or triangular.

Side: Nothing
Quocalimar(6470) Disputed
4 points

How can greedy even be defined?

Well it's not an official definition, but it could be defined as taking more than you need, while others lack what they need. The others lacking is important, because without the other's lacking you just have ambition.

Correct, every economic system has problems, and all are rooted by government intervention whether it is autistic, binary or triangular.

This is the main reason I'm on this side. To say nothing is wrong with capitalism is just biased.

Side: This is the problem/solution
0 points

What exactly is the problem with greed? I don't believe you mean being self-interested when you say greed. What do you mean by greed, and what is the problem with it?

Side: Nothing
Quocalimar(6470) Disputed
2 points

When one group or person has too much, while other groups or people have little or none. People always say Judge a country not by how rich the rich are but by how rich the poor are. Well America's poor aren't very rich because capitalism allows the rich to keep getting richer and the rest to fade into poverty.

Side: This is the problem/solution
2 points

The lack of regulation. Too much or too little regulation is not practical.

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

Unforuantely, regulation is not a byproduct of capitalism, that is the flaw of government bureaucracy whether to little or much.

Side: Nothing
Sitara(11101) Clarified
1 point

Agreed. .

Side: Nothing
1 point

The only appropriate regulation should be based on how people interact according to civil law. This means enforcement of contacts, laws against knowingly selling poisonous food etc.

Regulation tends to be laws that treat business as separate from people. Regulation also tends to be a simple money grab. If regulation was restricted to being based on civil laws already in place, we would have a lot less regulation in general.

Side: Nothing
Sitara(11101) Clarified
1 point

I think it depends on the type of regulation. I do not believe in anarchy, but statism sucks too. I quote Joseph H. Pilates when I say: Neither too much, nor too little, but just enough.

Side: Nothing
2 points

Just like Socialism it has political loophole.

All out Capitalism is where the government is NOT involved in business. This was a wake up call in the early 1900's as you can see from workers rights and etc.

Side: This is the problem/solution
2 points

Problems:

1. Honey Boo Boo Child

2. The Kardashians

3. Miley Cyrus

4. Lotteries

5. Democrats raising taxes.

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

The problem is that consumers often consume the wrong things?

Side: Nothing
2 points

Fostering a self centered nature, capitalism has survived by elevating a select few to a state of financial independence while simultaneously securing support from the majority with the promise of the potential for each individual to achieve the same level of "success". This simply isn't possibly because individuals in our society gauge their own success only in relation to the success of others. If everyone were on equal footing, nobody would feel superior, or comparatively successful. The idea that capitalism will ever result in a completely equitable society is a popular mass delusion and it is this delusion that will ensure its continued use well into the future.

Capitalism itself possesses no flaws, it is simply an elegant, efficient, self maintaining, and viscous cycle which promotes and encourages only the worst natural tendencies of the human race.

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

Capitalism is a Meritocracy (though I don't like the word). There is no delusion that everyone will be equally wealthy, only that successful people will deserve what they have.

The idea that productive people are successful and that poor people can be productive and become more successful in no implies that wealth will equalize. This isn't what keeps Capitalism going. The idea that I can build a better future for myself is what keeps it going. Not better compared to the Jones's, just better compared to today.

viscous cycle which promotes and encourages only the worst natural tendencies of the human race.

This is not a flaw to you? is there something better that isn't the above mentioned things?

Side: Nothing
Beardontcare(47) Disputed
1 point

Capitalism and meritocracy are two very distinct things. The meritocratic party for instance believes in equal opportunity, which must be enforced, because otherwise people who're born into rich families will have an advantage over others through no decision or action of their own.

I can't stress enough how wrong you are on this. I think F. A. Hayek got it right on one subject. Capitalism emerges because people blame their apparent "inferiority" on luck. For instance: "my neighbor was lucky to get that job". The injustice of the system works to it's advantage. Thus, the more rotten the system is, the better it functions.

Side: This is the problem/solution

The problem with capitalism is not the concept, but people in general. Capitalism is basically legalized theft, because the amount of markup, ways to get out of getting paid, loopholes in the law that keeps one from making honest deals, etc.

Dominion Homes here in Ohio built and sold houses to people they knew couldn't afford to make the payments and had several other tricks up their sleeve as well. One thing that they did was sell homes for zero down and then overinflated the value of the house that they financed, the homes weren't worth what the loan was. Normal home loans in this state are maximum 80% of the estimated value. Dominion made loans for 150% (example) of the value of the home. They had zero down for like a year then the payments were extremely high compared to the actual value of the house.

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2006/02/20/daily11.html?page=all

Side: This is the problem/solution
Jc41218(1560) Disputed
1 point

The problem with capitalism is not the concept, but people in general. Capitalism is basically legalized theft,

Taxation In Most Cases is Legalized "Theft" By The Government ....

Side: Nothing
2 points

Coercive taxation is not necessarily required for capitalism to function so it can't be said to be a problem with capitalism itself. Taxation happens in various economic systems.

Side: This is the problem/solution
2 points

Coercive taxation is not necessarily required for capitalism to function so it can't be said to be a problem with capitalism itself. Taxation happens in various economic systems.

Side: This is the problem/solution
0 points

Please explain how Capitalism is legalized theft.

Value is a tricky thing. If someone is willing to pay a given price, that's the value. Bubbles over-inflate prices, not companies.

The conditions that encouraged the kind of predatory lending you describe were not created by capitalism. There is no room in capitalism for a "risk free" loan, which is what Fanny and Freddie promised with tax dollars. No one would make loans to high risk borrowers if they had to cover the cost of default themselves. This would mean that a lot of people would not be able to buy a home (in actuality they couldn't anyway).

On a side note, Capitalism has no room for "too big to fail" either.

But again, how is unforced mutual trade at an agreed to price (capitalism) equivalent to legalized theft?

Side: Nothing
StickinStone(649) Clarified
1 point

Really? I got down for that? No one even answered the question! Sore losers.

Side: Nothing
1 point

Everything .

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

I find it interesting that no problem presented is followed by any solution. The statement that "everything" is wrong with capitalism isn't even helpful to the debate. With is the solution offered to the "everything" that is wrong with capitalism?

Side: Nothing

The innate issue with capitalism is that otherwise peaceful and seemingly productive activity may have a negative impact on third parties: other people, the environment and animals. Because there's no simple and thorough way of dealing with this, economic activity must be regulated, because it can do more harm than good.

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

I may need an example. Negative effects on third parties can be mitigated through laws that protect rights, including the right of the third party to sue for damage. Extra regulation is not necessarily required. Again, an example would be helpful because I know that there are situations where it is required.

Side: Nothing
Beardontcare(47) Disputed
1 point

Negative effects on third parties can be mitigated through laws that protect rights, including the right of the third party to sue for damage.

There are third parties which are not capable of going through a legal process. Mentally incapacitated people, children, "potential persons" and animals fit into such a category. A law protecting these beings from harm and exploitation is, in my books, regulation, because it involves making estimations and judgements for otherwise legally passive entities.

Defining terms like externality, regulation or rights is a troubling direction for this debate, but if you do choose to go down that path, please provide concrete examples and distinctions.

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

There is no better alternative. When peops find one, then I'm sure we'll all be much better off without capitalism.

But really, any political system is going to harbour corruption.

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

That's an interesting phrasing for a tautology. It's like saying. Capitalism is the best that there is. Once there is something better, things will be better.

Side: Nothing
thousandin1(1933) Clarified
1 point

I don't see how there is a dispute here?

Note the usage of the word 'is,' which is the present tense of the infinitive 'to be.'

So your simplification "Capitalism is the best that there is. Once there is something better, things will be better" is consistent even if you don't agree with it; 'Capitalism is the best that there [currently] is, with the possibility of something better being discovered.'

It's not even a tautology. It's a statement with nothing to back it up, but it's also one that you haven't disputed in the slightest; you really should have picked clarify if you weren't offering an actual dispute.

Side: Nothing
1 point

Not much, but crony capitalism is the problem. Conservatives think capitalism means help the rich

Side: This is the problem/solution
1 point

It is most unfortunate that "crony capitalism" is equated with capitalism. What do you think capitalism means?

Side: Nothing
Kitk34(162) Clarified
1 point

It is most unfortunate that "crony capitalism" is equated with capitalism. What do you think capitalism means?

I am curious to know what you think "capitalism" is?

Side: Nothing
1 point

Wealth Inequality and Unequal Opportunities, both of which are addressed under a Socialist system.

Side: This is the problem/solution