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.
I dunno if it's a good idea or not. It's just what we're gonna do.
As a species, we started off wandering around. Then we joined into little groups.. I dunno if anybody thought it was a good idea or not, but as civilization progressed, that's what we did. We organized into tribes, then villages, then states, then countries, and finally superpowers. Nobody gave that any thought...
The next step is obvious. And, it too doesn't matter what anybody thinks.. It's just what we're gonna do. My friend Al said, borders cause most of the worlds strife. He's right, of course. So, should we kill half of humanity to defend them, or get rid of them altogether??
Certainly, no one country is gonna give up their borders first.. But, imagine, if the whole world did it at once....
Globalization also known as free trade is a great idea, and here's why. The only alternative is protectionism. Protectionism is awful.
Interestingly, some proponents of Laissez-faire promote protectionism. The complete hypocrisy is ridiculous.
Protectionism allows the already powerful to gain Monopoly, monopsony, Oligopoly, and Oligopsony. Everyone show already know why monopolies are bad.
Monopsony, one buyer applying leverage to force suppliers to sell low is brought up less often. A perfect example is Walmart. Watch Walmart the high cost of low prices for an entertaining idea of how monopsony hurts the economy.
Companies that are monopolies area usually monopsony too. A town that has one store is a great example. Everyone has to buy from the company store, monopoly and the only work available is the same store, monopsony.
"“I owe my soul to the company store.”" Merle Travis
Effectively, allowing one entity to charge extortion prices by price gouging, monopoly. While using being one buyer of labor and using their leverage to lower prices, monopsony.
Oligopoly is just the same as monopoly except not quite as bad because there is say three entities often using the euphemism "playing nice." Same with Oligopsony. One problem is that this is more difficult to detect thus could go on for longer before being detected.
In the end protectionism leads to a non-competitive market. Leading to high prices and low wages.
II. What about the unemployed manufacturers and other industries?
One of the main attractions to protectionism is saving jobs. The fear of outsourcing and losing your job or a family member's job. Fear is the strongest and most negative emotion.
The answer is a vigorous welfare or support system. Wait, what? Let's face it as technology and the world changes people are going to lose their jobs due to no fault of their own. This is a very strong case for government unemployment compensation.
Whether it be a natural disaster, pandemic, outsourcing, automation, or other forms of displacement a strong support system is needed. To help displaced workers get back on their feet. With global warming bearing down on us and pandemics the idea of individuals are poor solely because they are lazy is absurdly naive.
We wouldn't want to save workers jobs that are obsolete and contribute nothing to the economy? Blacksmithing, punch cards library catalogs, manufacturing trebuchets, and many other job are obsolete. In lieu of saving these jobs we should invest in human capital.
Besides there are more insidious ways for a job to be stolen. For example prison labor. Paying people a dime an hour is exploitative and harms the economy. Unpaid internships leads to theft of jobs.
The whole entire notion that immigrant or outsourcing to foreign countries are coming to steal your jobs is xenophobic and outright racist fearmongering propaganda promoted by the powerful and greedy .
This post is long, but the answer is counter-intuitive and complex. Sometimes a short post won't do the topic justice.
Summary
Free trade is a much better choice than protectionism. Protectionism is a xenophobic, racist, myth, proliferated by fear mongering powerful and greedy bad political actors and robber barons. The villains Bernie Sanders and Trump are two excellent examples on both side of the political spectrum. We should invest in human capital and a robust welfare system to counter job displacement.
You'll have to define exactly what you mean by globalism Dana. The only globalism I know about is the crazy, unhinged crap Alex Jones rants about. Tell me, in your own words, what you think globalism is.
You can't stop the world making advances in communications and travel technology, and so you can't stop the world from feeling smaller and more connected.
Globalism, is a one world, government. ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
OK, fair enough. That too is inevitable. Perhaps not until the distant future, but if/when we become a spacefaring species and begin to colonise other worlds it will be completely impractical and stupid for Earth to be bogged down in political squabbling and internal power games involving dozens of different leaders. You can't stop something which is inevitably part of our own evolution and you can't necessarily determine it is bad before it has even happened. A one world government can only be as good or as bad as its own members, so in that respect it will be just like every other government which has ever existed.
I think your question suggests a paranoia about something you don't truly understand and are being persuaded to believe certain things about.
Are you not concerned that power concentrated in the hands of one or a few, would lead to a dictatorship?
I'm not concerned because that situation is no different to how reality has always been, everywhere in the world, if you pick out any country on the planet and use it as an example. Let's use America as an example. Power is concentrated in the hands of the few. Let's use Great Britain as an example. Power is concentrated in the hands of the few. And we can go on and on ad infinitum.
Capitalism is a system which concentrates power into the hands of the few. If you don't like living in this situation, then your enemy are capitalists, not globalists. When you have a big problem with power being concentrated into the hands of the few what you are is a socialist Dana.
This is an assumption that reality as it is is not something to be concerned about, because it is what it currently is. It is judging the situation by its own situation, which is a circular argument.
The concentration of power to the few is inherited by humanity, not by the systems. Blaming the systems instead of the creators is pretty simple. Socialism, Capitalism, Globalism, they are all giving room for powerhouses and financial or social dictatorships. So only blaming capitalism for concentrating power is wrong, or at least blaming the symptoms for being the cause.
This is an assumption that reality as it is is not something to be concerned about, because it is what it currently is. It is judging the situation by its own situation, which is a circular argument.
No it isn't. That's a total misrepresentation of what I just wrote. Either your problem is that you are dishonest or it is that you didn't understand what you just read.
When the human race eventually evolves into a spacefaring civilisation and has multiple planetary assets -- assuming it gets that far and trolls like you don't have your own way and destroy it first -- it will not be practically possible, as a matter of mere logistics, to sustain the current system of nation states. The civilisation will not be able to govern itself effectively if each individual planet cannot even agree with itself about the best course of action to take.
Stop purposefully misinterpreting the things you read you silly troll and go ask your parents for some more pocket money.
You don't know what capitalism, is. In a truly free market, everyone who is able is free to exchange labor for currency, and currency, for goods and services. The system you are refering to, is crony capitalism. I do agree with some of your points, though. I think you are quite, inelligent.
Ahahahaha! Let me just make sure I understand you correctly here. You are insulting my intelligence? Lmao. Dana, that's priceless. Good one! 😆
In a truly free market
Why don't you begin by explaining to us why you think a system literally rooted in the idea of power through private capital would ever produce a "free" market?? Are things usually free in capitalist systems? I think the problem we have here is the one we usually have Dana, in that you are literally so stupid you cannot separate fact from fiction.
Everyone who is able is free to exchange labor for currency
Hang on, you have that predictably backwards. Everybody who is able has no fucking choice but to exchange labor for capital because if they do not do that they will starve. The only two solutions to this problem are socialism or a rich parent.
The system you are refering to, is crony capitalism.
The system I am referring to is capitalism you pointlessly stupid bitch. You don't get to tell me what I was referring to. You have been indoctrinated with the false idea that capitalism is going wrong when it concentrates power into the hands of the few, but it is going right when it concentrates power into the hands of the few because that is the entire bloody point of the ideology in the first place!!!!! It is supposed to reward those who accumulate capital by bestowing them with more power than those who do not have capital. That is why it is fucking well called: CAPITALISM.
Oh Dana, they really have done a complete number on you girl. Right down to the way you've been convinced that parroting their right wing propaganda is a sign that you are intelligent.
I am not insulting your intelligence, you just want to be pissed off. Capitalism favors no one, and [rovides everyone the chance to earn money, and exchange it, for goods, and services. When favoritism is involved, it is not true capitalism. And yes, lazy people, should starve. If you are able to work but won't, you don't have the right, to someone else's wallet. If you can't work due to disability, that is a different story, so is age.
And to actually think you began by claiming I don't understand capitalism! 😆
Quite obviously to anybody with even half a functional brain cell, capitalism favours those who own capital!!
Dana, you are very probably the single most stupid person the world has ever produced. You haven't got a clue what you are talking about 100 percent of the time, every question you don't know the answer to you simply ignore, every gaping hole in your argument you simply ignore, and when you respond you simply repeat verbatim the exact same nonsense I have already wasted time meticulously refuting.
If you don't want to debate then go somewhere else because it bores the shit out of me the way you don't acknowledge anything anybody ever says back to you.
Fair enough. I can agree that capitalism favors those who own capital, however, it otherwise, does not favor, anyone.
Dana, this is a self-contradictory statement mate. If capitalism favours one group over another, it cannot then simultaneously not favour anybody. Do you understand hun? Both of those things can't be true at once.
Capitalism is a dictatorship of the rich. Rich people own the media and the platforms which publish media. You are therefore getting all of your information about the world and its daily events from people with a vested interest in the continuation of capitalism. Capitalism benefits them, not you, not me, and not 95 percent of everybody else.
Darling I never said that I don't want to debate. That would be a strawman fallacy
And if you said you didn't want to be a bricklayer while you were in the process of laying bricks, would that be a strawman fallacy too???
You don't have to say that you don't want to debate. You evidence it every time you ignore the problems other people identify in your arguments, and continue repeating those same arguments as if they hadn't already been addressed and refuted. You evidence it every time somebody takes the time to explain clearly why you are wrong, and you write back: "Yes it is and I will never change my mind".
As per usual, you are the one using fallacies. In this instance you are using an implied false dichotomy, by suggesting that unless you expressly and openly state that you do not want to debate, you cannot therefore not want to debate. That would obviously be false.
You weren't debating. You ignored the questions I asked and the points I made. All except the last one where you tried to admit capitalism favors the rich while still maintaining your original claim that capitalism doesn't favour anybody. Writing sentences which contradict themselves has nothing to do with debate. Ignoring criticism of your argument is not debate either.
I am still waiting for you to explain why you believe the market is free in a society in which the market survives by exploiting people for capital. Perhaps shut up falsely accusing me of strawman fallacies and start there, with the question I asked you a day ago.
I will answer your question when you tell me why you socialists believe you have the right to everyone's, wallet. I support welfare for those unable to work, or those who have a legitimate need, but you selfish socialists and communists don't have the right, to everyone's wallet. THAT is capitalism.
I will answer your question when you tell me why you socialists believe you have the right to everyone's, wallet.
No chance you fat ignorant bitch. How dare you try to avoid supporting your own statements against precise criticism by deflecting to yet more lies. You fat dishonest pig, Dana.
Your "question" is loaded with the false premise that socialists want to take everybody else's money. I don't have to disprove your false assertions, yet alone when you are using them to desperately change the subject from earlier false assertions you have made, which I have meticulously refuted.
Telling lies and then deflecting to different lies when you are called out on your first lies is no form of debate you mad, thoroughly dishonest bitch.
This free market you've been persuaded to incessantly heap praise upon as though it were some kind of beacon of light and hope in the darkness of captivity, does not exist. It isn't real. The reality is that you need a large chunk of capital to enter the market, and if you want to compete with all the other sharks in the tank you need a supply of capital which is even larger than that. Have you ever heard the saying, you have to have money to make money? Capitalism discriminates against people who have no capital, and because they are discriminated against they cannot acquire capital. Conversely, the opposite is also true. Capitalism rewards and favours those of us fortunate to own capital, and because it favours those people, they then find it easier to acquire more capital.
That is the reality once someone tears off the big pink ribbon they've been putting on it for the last 200 years.
I only heap praises on Yeshua, but I do mention capitalism, because socialists and communists, are braindead zombies
Oh, OK. Lol. So you heap praises on a socialist, but socialists and Communists are braindead zombies. Gotcha. Ahahahaha! 😆 And you Dana, are one impossibly stupid bitch. What do you suppose Love Thy Neighbor means? Do you think it means selling them stuff for more than you bought it for so you can exploit them for profit? Ahahaha! You stupid fucking bitch.
That's Miss Bitch to you, and Yeshua is not bound by political ideology, or Party, making Him the First Independent. I also will not be reading biased propaganda by some of the same people, that hate Christians, and Jews. I was born June 26, 1981, not yesterday.
That's Miss Bitch to you, and Yeshua is not bound by political ideology, or Party
It is pretty fucking clear which political ideology Yeshua is bound by you cognitively dissonant madwoman. He fed people for free, washed their feet for free, and healed them for free. In capitalism that's called bankruptcy.
Yeshua is God and Lord Almighty and therefore not bound by ideologies created by His creation
He is bound by the implications of his own behaviour you fucking retard. How many times has God sold you a kitchen or a car? Do you put a quarter in your piggy bank to pay him every time you make a prayer?
I am not sexually active, do try again. Yeshua is not bound by anything. That is the point of being God and Lord. He laid His Life down, it was not taken, from Him.
No I am not, and you are a liar and a slanderer......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Yeshua is the Beacon of Light, capitalism is equal opportunity to earn, capital.
😆
You literally agreed yesterday that there is not equal opportunity because those who own capital are favoured, therefore it is easier for them to earn capital.
I am genuinely curious about you Dana. How do you manage to live life holding simultaneous beliefs which directly contradict one another?
So equal opportunity to be shunned from the kingdom of heaven? Since, "It is easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven".
Yeshua was a socialist so stop mutilating his ideas.
I'm not concerned because that situation is no different to how reality has always been
AKA "I've always lived under Capitalism, am not concerned about it, but will gripe about Capitalism anyway as I try to put a system in place that may be worse because I lack basic common sense and have feelings and emotions I need to emote."
I've always lived under Capitalism, am not concerned about it
Oh, you're not concerned about it? That's nice, Bronto. Only could you then maybe explain why you've written four posts in four minutes on four different accounts, all saturated with lies and/or distortions, and all in defence of capitalism?
You're just a crook pal. That's literally what you are. And thankfully the American people saw through it this time.
We can agree on that Bronto. Nobody with any common sense would come onto a site with such low traffic, change accounts four times in four minutes to agree with his own lies, and then expect to be taken seriously by anybody else on Earth.
Lead to a dictatorship?? That happens all the time WITHOUT "globalism"! But then, a LOT of people seem to like that idea even in America. 70 million voted for it in the last election! Luckily, almost 80 million voted against it! Those countries that have it don't like it!
Two things cause most wars, religions, and border disputes. Getting rid of both would leave us little to fight about. It couldn't be "the hands of a few", it would HAVE to be in the hands of many, and, as the masses spend more time mixing races without religions or borders to restrict them, they will see more "eye to eye". Good idea??
This will certainly be worse than all dictatorships, AlofRI. You may think there is no difference. But you clearly do not have the capacity nor the comprehension nor the perception to foresee that a one world government will lead towards totalitarian enslavement and 1984 based tragedies. The New World Order is nothing good. In fact, it is what brings the end of the world and the Second Coming of the Lord, Jesus Christ, our Savior, our Messiah, the King of Kings, the Prince of Peace and the Only Begotten Son of God.
Well, we certainly wouldn't want the "second coming of the lord", now, would we?
I am an atheist, proudly! I don't fear this "second coming" as you seem to. I am also proudly, a person who believes in Freedom of Religion, as long as it doesn't lead to problems. The problem is, with Christianity and some other religions, it frequently does. MOST frequently! Evangelicals trying to take over America and turn it into something it wasn't intended to be is a good example! They fear their "God" so much that they have twisted their Bible, and Jesus, every which way but loose!
You live your way, I'll live mine! I recently died and was brought back, I have no fear of dying. It's peaceful. It doesn't have people like YOU in it .... peaceful.
you clearly do not have the capacity nor the comprehension nor the perception to foresee that a one world government will lead towards totalitarian enslavement
How utterly laughable. You are enslaved from the moment you are born until the moment you die and it is your lack of comprehension which prevents you from noticing this. You are a useful idiot of power who is preaching to people that have abundantly more insight and critical thinking skills than you do.
Your hypocrisy, burritolunch has just proven you wrong and proven me right. Globalism is a danger and your paranoia proves you are more a danger to yourself and to others than safe. Your arguments are regarded as senseless, nonsense and invalid. Cry me a river and get over it. A one world government is indeed dangerous and it will not be agreed upon by the majority of people on earth as it will become a tyrannical system of control. YIsRisenLord is correct and so am I. It will lead to a dictatorship and you will be one of the many slaves amongst it. Well done on enslaving yourself. You are truly delusional. Your self destructive nature, pride and hubris will get yourself killed.
Your hypocrisy, burritolunch has just proven you wrong and proven me right
The only thing you have proven is that you are quite seriously unwell.
Globalism is a danger and your paranoia
Just unbelievable. Seriously, only you could make a paranoid comment, and then immediately follow up in your next clause by accusing the person you are addressing of being paranoid. And you began by accusing him of hypocrisy!!!!!
Let's be clear. The things you write are so utterly and exhaustively unhinged, most people with any common sense just steer well away from you. That's why you come here every day and waste your time talking to empty air.
Nope. The New World Order is a problem. Revelations is coming true. One World Government with a one world religion that isn't Christian? Well that's unleashing the anti-Christ. God will not allow this to occur.
Here is a video explaining why globalism is bad. Watch it. Or don't. The truth is the truth. Globalism is not a good idea. It may look great on paper, just like communism or socialism etc etc. But when used, when put into actual use? Did Communism ever work? Never. Neither will globalism. I have spoken facts and only facts. Hypocrites who say otherwise and use ad hominem towards me are automatically invalidated, denounced and debunked.
Did you watch your own video? About halfway through it shows the exact problems with protectionism, the only counter to globalization.
Time stamp 2:10
"Politicians lock down borders, decrease work visas, and punish companies for not using local labors. This only makes things worse. History has shown that protectionism leads to slower overall growth. Decreases of competitiveness of nations engaged in such policies."
Can lead to a trade war decreasing GDP by 14%. The video ends by saying we need to increase globalization. In other words you argument is invalidated by your own source.