Debate Info

Lugenpresse Deny Everything
Debate Score:3
Total Votes:3
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Lugenpresse (1)
 Deny Everything (2)

Debate Creator

MrClementine(62) pic

The Truth About Capitalism

Increasingly, an individual’s chances in life are determined by their starting point (socio-economic status at birth, where they were born, etc.), resulting in economies and societies that too often reproduce rather than reduce historic inequalities. Across most socio-economic systems today—a person’s background often predetermines the level of education they will attain, the type of work they will do and the level of income they will earn. This “lock-in” from birth has consequences for growth, cohesion and innovation across societies. 

Across economies, children born in less affluent families tend to experience greater barriers to success than those born in more affluent families. These inequalities of opportunity may become entrenched and foster long-term economic inequalities as well as deep economic and social cleavages. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between a leading measure of economic inequality (the Gini coefficient) and the degree to which one’s parents’ income predicts one’s own income (i.e. intergenerational income elasticity). This graphic, also known as “The Great Gatsby Curve”, reveals a strong linear relationship in which countries with high levels of relative social mobility—such as Finland, Norway or Denmark—also exhibit lower levels of income inequality. Conversely, countries with low relative social mobility—such as China or Brazil—also exhibit high levels of economic inequality. As highlighted by thinkers such as John Rawls and Amartya Sen, in an ideal world, individuals would have the capabilities to prosper, irrespective of their background or personal characteristics.

Fascinating article.


Side Score: 1

Deny Everything

Side Score: 2
1 point

I'd say that's a thumbs up. :-)

Side: Lugenpresse
1 point

Well, the only contrary evidence I could offer would be anecdotal which would be insufficient to offer as an acceptable counter-argument.

However, for those entrepreneurs who are prepared to stick their necks out (note how the tortoise never makes headway until it sticks its neck out) and take a chance embarking on a business venture is where capitalism presents the perfect vehicle for their enterprise.

Side: Deny Everything

Well, the only contrary evidence I could offer would be anecdotal which would be insufficient to offer as an acceptable counter-argument.

No, I think it is very demonstrable that a person can start out poor and end up rich. However, the actual probability of this happening in reality is so small that it would not be unfair to call these occasions the exception which proves the rule. A false account of the feasibility of social mobility is deliberately used to indoctrinate children into capitalism at an early age, and that is done in many ways. For example, parading young pop stars and actors on TV, or publishing inspirational statements from sports stars who have already reached the heights of success.

Side: Deny Everything
Mongele(210) Clarified
1 point

Well, my problem is once someone starts to argue with me I automatically assume that I am wrong and the other person's angle makes more sense than my own.

On this particular issue I can only refer to my personal experiences and state that my family, and all those in my neighborhood were desperately poor.

When I say poor, I mean poor, like very little food etc.

Myself and my siblings all did quite well.

My eldest sister married an Army Colonel, next my other sister married a well heeled financier, then me, with over 2 million £s invested and two quite expensive properties, my home and an apartment near Nice in the Cote d' Azure. .

My two brothers are in business together, and suffice to say they're both significantly better off that I am.

My young sister, and youngest member of the family married a senior civil servant who, as an example of his seniority, has a direct line to Downing Street.

Many of my peers from the good-old-bad-old-days have also become achievers, one of whom became quite a famous pop singer back in the sixties/seventies.

The only help we ever received was from the left wing Labour government whose ''welfare state'' ensured we got our 1/3 pint of milk each school day and a free lunch as well as medical care.

Without these social benefits I doubt if we would all have survived.

But the upshot/moral of my account is that if an idiot like me, born and bred within the Capitalist system can 'make it' from such a deprived background, so can anyone

As there is no viable, ''oven-ready'' alternative to the Capitalist system we must compete in the free, ( or free-for-all) market system which, so far at any rate, is the only game in town.

Side: Lugenpresse