Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
19
debates
50.0%
won
Topic
#6704
Any economic system can never be pure, therefore with what we have in reality, laissez faire capitalism is the best in human practice
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 3,500
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1382
rating
477
debates
46.96%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Because if human nature and sin, there will always be people who have greed or exploitation in their minds. So if we take that into account we have to use an economic system that can withstand that ill involvement, basically preventing government intervention that can go out of hand. Socialism and State capitalism don’t work with this, communism runs on this, therefore L-Z is the best to prevent this.
"Any economic system can never be pure, therefore with what we have in reality, laissez faire capitalism is the best in human practice"
Here in lies the issue with the very statement. The premise and initial clause communicates that a system can never be pure. So the understanding is, whatever it is that adulterates something, dilutes or weakens is not the best for quality, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and etc .
A system such as the proceeding statement mentioned would be given this same premise application . So it's self negating.
Now the second issue with a system that is pretty much liberal is like a lot of things in the hands of people whether we're talking about diet, guns, sexuality, government. The best system would be a system that maintains a structure, rules, do's and don'ts or it isn't a system at all. It's chaos. It's criminality. It's laundering. It's extortion. It's the black market. It's blackmail. It's bribery (politics). On and on and on.
We don't make capitalism better by liberalizing it but conserving areas of improved economic results and lessen in some areas.
Whether in the industrial, agricultural, pharmaceutical, corporate, all areas of commerce in the economic world counts.
Round 2
An unpure L-Z would mean that there is slight intervention with the government, this is what is regulating the economic systems. Making it better that it is impure because the government can only get there hands on that small amount and are prevented to have any more control.
A black market is a cause of government intervention in markets.
I don't see how "carefree" libertarian ran capitalism is the best of all economic systems.
The very best businesses succeed due to structure organized constrained conditions. So major fortune 500 industries prosper. Regular brick and mortar as well as e-commerce stores prosper.
Investors in different assets from the financial markets, stock markets and social content creators succeed due to constrained or restrictive guideline based structures. Investors make decisions based on fundamental rules, principles and disciplines. This will not allow a so called laissez faire disorder that just allows a system to collapse on itself.
This is with any system. If you carry out this disorder on a mechanical network or vehicle, the system will fall apart. All the specifications, rules and boundaries of maintenance will allow the system to function for what it's for. Allowing anything and anyone to just be is the opposite of constructive civility and civilization.
Which means liberalism still has some restraint on it. So many people that wish to express themselves like others cannot necessarily do so unless facing charges , fines, probation or imprisonment. Whether we're talking about self identity and orientation or more relative to the topic, commerce, all niches would face charges and legal ramifications.
I yield.
Round 3
The point of laissez faire is that it provides a system that doesn’t crumble a country when it fails, it can sustain
Yes I've explained it cannot sustain. Things sustain because of constraints and civilization and things not being all willy nilly any ole kind of way.
This is what the brainwashing of liberalism has accomplished.
Round 4
If something can go low but not crash completely and be able to bounce back up high fast, then it can sustain, ergo LZ can sustain
Yea like me doing squats lifting weights.
I apparently can't sustain doing those in spite of initially how low and how fast I rise.
Being able to recover or not doesn't weigh into sustainability in this subject.
Keeping the epicenter of the topic.
If I have to help your business bounce back year after year, it doesn't mean you've sustained as a capitalist. If it's hanging on by a thread as not fully completely crashing and burning, it was the lack of regulation to maintain being capital. Being capital is being big at the top. Not shrinking, not getting smaller, not going lower to try and make a comeback.
That's exactly what this economic system your suggesting has the nature of. A shaky, bouncing back, tumultuous, volatile thing.
So we're talking about the best economic practice and those economics for a capitalist isn't that. Capitalists grow, stay growing.
Round 5
Other economic systems don’t work until capitalism is brought in some some manner
The problem is not capitalism itself, it's your suggestion to how its best run is invalid.
Case closed.