CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
So long as it is accompanied by a strong safety net to protect the weak and the poor, then yes, it's the best system we have right now (although not necessarily the best system possible).
It keeps countries at peace, yet brings about war. Increases worlds standard of living, yet enslaves. All and all its a mixed bag, but it is the best general economic philosophy we have. In my opinion of course.
Its a double edged sword, for us westerners its pretty good, I like you know no other way so my instinct wants to say yes, but the reality is that more suffer as a result of capitalism and the proof is all over the world.
I was answer subjectively, as in the only way one can when asked if something is 'good' or 'bad'. Sorry to sound cruel but the issues faced by the world because of capitalism do not affect me. Or if they do, they haven't become bad enough to make me feel like a change is needed. So to answer the question, is capitalism Good? Subjectively, yes, it is to millions of Americans who have little to no cares in the world because of the competitive system it requires.
Hey, I live up in Colorado and I've seen plenty of wildlife. Hell, I've seen deer and a crap load of trees in my backyard alone. Also, ever heard of national parks. Making money and preserving wildlife at the same time.
You know who suffers, the weak. All those idiots who dropped out of school and planed on living on welfare and smoke weed are getting what they diserve. People who worked hard in school and made good choices get what they diserve/ wanted.
In a perfect world i would agree 100% but the reality is capitalism fuels greed and greed fuels suffering, we have many examples ranging from the abuse of our own planet to watching people die because they lack the means to give us something in return.
I don't know so much about it being X because of y with capitalism and greed. I believe they are independent of one another, and that people will be greedy regardless of their economical system, and that no economical system will change people's overlying nature to want and strive for more than they need.
We live in a cause and effect reality; behaviors are developed or triggered based on various conditional factors, greed is no exception to this.
My guess is that it’s formed out of an instinctual will to survive, a necessity of resources required for survival, and a real or imagined scarcity of those resources. I don’t intend to over simplify it, but I see those as the primary sources resulting in hoarding or greedy behavior.
The argument for capitalism creating greed stems from several factors.
A profit structure determined by the availability of resources, either real or imagined (supply and demand).
An encouragement of consumption far past what is required for survival. (increase demand, increase scarcity, increase profit)
Consumerism/ materialism promoted as a type of social status indicator or source of happiness.
A real or imagined necessity to survive through competition.
Perhaps there has yet to be an economic system which doesn’t function on these principles, but I wouldn’t say that people would be greedy regardless of their economic system. Economics are a conditional factor just like any other. A person scrambling to hoard apples in an orchard looks rightfully strange to those who know there will always be enough apples for everyone to eat, it wouldn’t be too far-fetched to assume he came from a place where there weren’t enough apples to go around.
Being greedy is not any more natural than wearing a jacket. If it weren’t cold out, the natural inclination to grab a coat would not be triggered. Conditional behaviors have been misinterpreted as human nature for far too long. The problem I see in this is that attributing it to human nature ignores causation and suggests that “that’s just the way we are; no sense in trying to change it.” ...It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I thought you were saying that greed and capitalism are independent of one another, that greed would occur regardless of what economic system is used, and that no economic system would change our behavior because our nature dictates that we will always strive for more than we need.
I trust that you weren’t just parroting common misconceived notions about human nature often used to justify capitalism, but it seems like your comment held a lot more weight than just acknowledging that you personally wouldn’t know how to change it.
Look at it this way. Here in America, a place that's capitalism shriveled up and died long ago, has a company called Apple. This company gets other companies to support it to save money, makes a new Isomething using it's supporting companies technology, sells it for hundreds of dollars, and then sues the supporting companies to get even more money. Greed no matter what the situation my friend.
I’m not sure what you mean by this, it doesn’t seem to relate in any way to what I was discussing with DrawFour.
At any rate, I don’t see how you can posit that capitalism shriveled up and died long ago by providing an example of how it functions and is still alive today...
Greed does more good than bad. Greed causes compition and when two businesses to become more apelling to the public by lowering prices. Greed also leads to human advancements. Are you saying a perfect world is a world where everything is always the same, where were always at square one. You want no matter how hard you work, or if you don't work at all, we should all get the same. That's just communism, a broken system, with out all the secret police killing people who don't like the goverment, or as you call it socialism
No matter how you look at it greed is not good, greed is a social flaw that unfortunately our society embraces as normal behavior, however I do agree that greed creates competition and competition creates technological advancements but at the cost of suffering and destroying our planet in the process, we as humans need to embrace a more unified approach to technological advancements, social development and governmental structure if we are ever to advance humanity to its fullest potential.
No, he has explained it. Once again, you're not listening.
What he is saying is that, since there will be a rapture (which would shortly result after such an event) that we should focus on human development, as the environment would be totaled as a result.
His argument is not tautological in nature, so he is not begging the question. You may think that he's dodging your claims, but even if he was, that's not question begging.....
STOP WITH THE LOGICAL FALLACIES WEBSITE THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.
Also, thanks for single-handedly going through my arguments and downvoting them.
His argument justifying capitalism is predicated on his religious beliefs, if you refuse to discuss religion, then likewise you refuse to refute his point.
Thank you Stickers for pointing that out to this dimwit. Hey buddy, I am debating on capitalism. I'm just using religion to prove that capitalism is good.
People who take advantage of these dumbass new systems deserve some suffering. How come people who do nothing with their lives to get the same results as people who work hard all their lives.
It is unchristian to wish suffering on the poor. The Bible says that what you do unto the least of these, you do unto Yeshua. Your refusal to love the poor is very typical on the radical right wing.
I did not say I hate the poor. I'm saying those people who CHOOSE to do nothing with their life, despite their chances to get somewhere in life. I'm talking about those high school dropouts and people who want to be "getto". Work should be rewarded and laziness should not.
You call yourself a Christian and you deny the fact that the Bible says that what you do unto the least of these and you have the nerve to wish suffering on people? You are what is wrong with religion.
I didn't wish suffering unto anyone, I just pointed out that in capitalism warfare isn't there to make people think "it doesn't matter if you work or not, we'll send you the money of a person who works hard and pays his taxes".
Yes you did when you said: People who take advantage of these dumbass new systems deserve some suffering. How come people who do nothing with their lives to get the same results as people who work hard all their lives.
I'm not wishing suffering unto them, I'm pointing out why they suffer in this system, also if you are so pissed about how I'm treating people bad then why do you follow that guy around and dislike everything he says, support the system where hard work isn't rewarded, and repeat the same annoying comment dispite explaining about that comment is wrong and ignorant.
Yes you did when you said: People who take advantage of these dumbass new systems deserve some suffering. How come people who do nothing with their lives to get the same results as people who work hard all their lives.
That's never really the case. People who were brought up without a good education throughout no fault of their own go on to get jobs where they work long hours for little pay. So your hippy stoner image isn't accurate
In matter of fact, how many homeless people do you know that have children. When a homeless man get a child (and gives some lady a shit load of STDs) and can't even feed himself already he's going to drop him off at an orphanage. For those parents who just don't give enough of a shit to send there kids to school (unless they're having them help on the farm) they shouldn't be allowed to keep that kid.
Overall, I'd say yes. Capitalism makes competition in the market which helps increase technological and product advancement.
The only downfall to capitalism is that it can lead to greed, corruption, injustice, and unfairness among social classes, if not monitored and controlled.
One also has to take into consideration that there will always be the poor and the rich; it is impossible to truly have everyone in society on an equal level.
2. The results of their work should more determined there place in life. People who work hard get the nice jobs. People who struggled but made it through should get a job they could live on. People who flunk out of school because of no effort in school shoun't be givin a life paid with tax payer dollars
3. Compition and work should be the same. Compition always has benefits for society. Two business competing leads to lower prices and/or better quality. When two workers competing for say employe of the month leads to more or better work for the same pay.
Capitalism isn't a fair system. Firstly, 3% of the world's population own 80% of it's wealth. Is it fair that workers in Africa work up to 16 hours per day yet they only make $0.10 per day and then other people such as professional sports players earn $2.00 per second for playing a game? Capitalism looks good to the rich but to the poor it is completely unfair.
I'm talking about where we live. The system isn't going to work up there thanks to slavery in the past. Most of the world has outlawed slaves but up there they still need to change. They are basically stuck in a cast system right now, but how do you think it will work in more devolved nations.
You started slavery in the past and left them in the state they are currently in. If big American corporations actually had some morals, they would buy the coffee and cocoa beans from the African farmers for more. A company like Starbucks buys in 1kg of coffee for about $1 and sells it for $250, is that a fair and good system to you.
Besides, if we're just talking about America or the Western world, it still doesn't work. You have families such as the Hilton's where they have family members such as Paris who hasn't worked a full day in her life yet she is worth millions. Then you have construction workers who work every single day yet they get minimum wage.
Is that a good system? If you want a fair system, you have to look more left. If you work to the best of your abilities and you take according to your needs, that's an efficient and more fair system rather than having people born into their future where people like Paris Hilton are born into a world where they don't have to work a day in their lives and then other people are born into a world where they have to work all their life but they could only dream of having the riches of one of the Hiltons.
1. Slavery wasn't created by Americans, hell the Britians really jumped the gun on that a long time ago. Double hell, we stopped slavery, every heard of Abraham Lincoln. Triple hell, your judging all of America, and me, on one company that I don't even own, predigest. Hilton doesn't have to work because they had a family member who worked his/her ass off for his/her families future. Quadruple hell, your judging all of America on one family , double predigest. Take a look at the big picture.
Hell once more, all that bad stuff your talking about in America is under a system with constantly demising capitalism. America has a toe nail worth of capitalism left, so all this bad stuff your complaining about isn't because of capitalism.
What? Firstly, America was just as responsible for the slave trade as the British and Africans. Also, Lincoln stopped the slave trade, yes, but after 300 years of the Americans strongly supporting it. Then once Lincoln stopped it, it wasn't a national decision. The Americans still try to make out like everyone of them supported the end of slavery. In fact, most were against Lincoln on that and they protested strongly.
Yes, Conrad Hilton worked very hard to start his hotel chain, but think of all the other people who did exactly the same amount of work just in a different sector. The relatives of them aren't rich and famous.
America is the personification of capitalism, the whole country is based around that ideology. That's why it's such a failure in taking care of its citizens. It's good in a militaristic and technological sense but it still doesn't have free health care, obesity levels are through the roof, the education system is a flop.
These are all failings because the government work on a capitalist base where money matters more than people.
Are ya joking? You guys were the kings of slave trading, you guess basically owned Africa. At least some of use started stopping slavery over time. Took you guy forever.
America WAS capitalistic, but now it's at least 70% hippies, liberals, and democrats. For the second time all this bad stuff is happening under a system with just a toe nail of capitalism. What needs to happen is we need more capitalism, and the president should do something about all these damn problems.
this isn't a "but communism is!" argument, I'm simply saying, no it isn't. Neither are, I suppose in realistic world capitalism is better than communism, socialism, anarchism etc, but that doesn't make it good. The principle maybe, but mankind is not so straight forward as to all conform to one simple principle. hence corruption, as is very common in capitalist powers, which I might remind you isn't a good thing.
I think we should just go back to having emperors like the Romans and just live as they did. So much simpler ;)
The Romans? Oh ya, those guys who killed, torchered, and crucified so many of their own people that Jesus himself had to come down and wash all sin. And the Roman took no time to become filthy with sin.
Oh hey Larry, what's up man. Hey remember the other day when you didn't kiss the emperor's foot. Yaaaa, could you lay on that cross, I need to nail you to it. Sooooryyyyy.
CreateDebate. Create in this could just mean creationism which is about God. Debate could mean complain or argue. This could be a site where Christians going trough hard times come to complain to God and argue that his plan is messed up. Hmm, great Scott, I just thought of the next top thing. Hey, are you having hard times and blame God, well I got the thing for you. Just a simple $19.95 and a trip to hell and you can blich all day long. Sound interesting?
There is no capitalism, capitalism naturally degrades into corporatism because wealth is power and influence. Corporatism is bad, capitalism is a pipe dream.
Capitalism is an economic ideology that collapses upon itself. In the capitalist system, competition supposedly is held sacrosanct. But all capitalistic enterprises seek to destroy the competition thereby fomenting monopoly. For that very reason, it is a flawed ideology. Capitalism moreover goes hand in hand with liberal political philosophy that asserts government's most basic function is the protection of private property and the equalization of formal rights. Capitalism necessarily exacerbates and exploits inequality--those enterprises with more resources will necessarily subsume those with inferior ones. So capitalism butts head first into the liberal position that government is supposed to guarantee certain rights to its human parties. Under the capitalist system, inequality is furthered thus superseding the rights and guarantees provided by the liberal, constitutional position. This the reason America is so fucked up. We have these rights on paper that the government is supposed to guarantee, but private power centers (i.e. business) destroy those rights. When you are employed by a private business, you forfeit all of your constitutional rights. You no longer have the right to free speech, religion, assembly, arms, freedom from incriminating yourself, and property or intellectual contributions. You cease to be a human being in the eyes of your private employer. As soon as your are employed by a private business, you are no longer a human being, but a human RESOURCE to be exploited just like any other material used in production.
Capitalism is the best. Competition causes business to grow, which causes the economy to grow and since creating a monopoly is illegal, no one business will gain the upper hand. Plus when you are employed by a private business, you don't forfeit all your rights because no one is forcing you to work for them. If you don't like the policy then quit and find somewhere else to work. That's the best part of a free capitalism, there are more jobs. Business are constantly being created and growing.
Capitalism looks good on paper. However, in practice, unregulated capitalism has shown repeatedly in history to result in market failure, corruption, monopolies, robber barons, worker exploitation, dangerous working conditions, child labor, violence against workers who peaceably assemble or speak out, and environmental disasters.
Every good thing about capitalism: the voice of the consumer in setting prices, competition, and theoretical "cream rising to the top (which never really happens in practice with this system)," are undone by the very system that makes them possible. In the end, it results in extreme wealth disparity, and injustice.
Who gets the bad end of that, the losers. The people who don't work in life. The acohalics, the druggies, and the "Gangstas". Capitalism motivates kids to make better choices.
So, you believe in social darwinism, and that the powerful and rich are inherently good, temperent people. Well, that's simply not true.
There are plenty of hard-working people who live their entire lives in poverty. There are also plenty of rich people who have never worked a day in their lives. Moreover, there are plenty of alcoholics (alcoholics are in every class strata), druggies (rich people can afford designer drugs, and they do use them) and "gangsters (just look at Wall Street)" that have more money than they will ever need.
The "cream" does not rise to the top, in our system. Our system is essentially feudalism re-tooled for a post-industrial society. The rich tend to be born into wealth, and the poor people who "made it" can be counted and named because of how rare it is. You can assume that if a person is wealthy, they probably are wealthy because someone many generations ago got lucky, or they were born into a class that it was easy to become rich themselves. Most rich people had a tremendous advantage in the birth lottery. To deny this, is to deny fundamental sociological truths.
Your argument presupposes that ALL rich people are 100% good, and all poor people are 100% bad. That is EXACTLY how people thought in the medieval period, you've just bought into the myth that maintains social stability in a socially immobile, unfair society.
If it were simply a matter of "trying" to become wealthy, our wealth distribution would be much more fair than it is. The vast majority of poor people do not want to be poor, so do not think every single poor person hasn't done something to lift themselves out of poverty. If it were as easy as "don't drink or do drugs," then we would have almost no poor people. Unfortunately drugs and alcohol are not what makes you rich or poor.