Instigator / Con
18
1472
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Topic

Socialism is is Evil

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
9
12
Sources points
6
8
Spelling and grammar points
3
4
Conduct points
0
4

With 4 votes and 10 points ahead, the winner is ...

Pinkfreud08
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Economics
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
30,000
Contender / Pro
28
1614
rating
17
debates
85.29%
won
Description
~ 163 / 5,000

Simple.I believe socialism is evil and morally wrong. No personal attacks. Your point is to try and convince me that socialism is not evil and it is morally great.

Round 1
Con
Forfeited
Pro
Due to the nature of this topic, I do not have to prove why anything is moral, You have to prove to me why it is immoral. However before we begin I would like to define Socialism, Redistribution of wealth, And evil. Also pro will waive the last round since I am using this round to establish rules and definitions.

Socialism: The state owns the common means of production through investment or regulation, And redistributes wealth.

Redistribution of Wealth: Redistribution of income and redistribution of wealth are respectively the transfer of income and of wealth (including physical property) from some individuals to others by means of a social mechanism.

Evil: Harmful to society

Round 2
Con
The seizing of your own property and wealth is immoral. It is theft, just by the government. Socialist countries often in pose taxes on almost everything and those taxes are extremely high. Lets a business man earns 10 million dollars per year. You than take 4.5 million of that and redistribute it in the lower class. That is clearly theft. The businessman worked for his money yet you take almost half and give it to others.

The next reason why its immoral is because tax payers are paying for people who do not have the ability to live very well (the poor). Also, you can not set your own prices. The government decides how you sell your own services.This completely reduces any chance of me wanting to go to school and earn myself a good job, why not just make pencils in a factory for eight hours and go get free things, that the social class above me has payed for.
Pro
“ The seizing of your own property and wealth is immoral. It is theft, just by the government.”

  • Let me ask my opponent a question, are you an anarchist? Because since you’re against the redistribution of wealth/taxes, then you must be against the government in general due to the government being RUN on the redistribution of wealth.

Assuming my opponent is an anarchist I will address why anarchism has never or will never work at all, however assuming my opponent isn’t an anarchist then this is a glaring contradiction.

“ The next reason why it's immoral is that taxpayers are paying for people who do not have the ability to live very well (the poor).”

  • Very false accusation to make, according to the NCSL in 2019 only 3.8 % of Americans were unemployed which were presumably mentally ill people, cripples, or old people. Or perhaps those who cannot find unemployment.

The fact is the majority of society poor people included are indeed working and contributing. For those who aren’t it’s not that they don’t want to it's just there are no jobs available at the moment most likely. The rest are simply those cheating the system which is a VERY small minority mind you.

I mean does my opponent believe that rich people don’t benefit from an educated, healthy, and abundant workforce to perform jobs?

Free college would increase the number of educated employees in the workforce, national healthcare would increase the number of healthy employees thereby increasing worker productivity, and welfare help stabilizes their workers.

Think about it like this, you have two sandwich shops,

Bob's sandwich shop:

  • Doesn’t offer the workers a good healthcare plan and as a result, the workers are always sick which decreases their productivity.
  • Doesn’t offer his workers educations which makes them prone to mistakes and less capable.
  • Spends his surplus money instead on a new house and a jet, however since his workers aren’t smart nor productive his business is slacking.

Bobby's sandwich shop:

  • Offers his workers a great healthcare plan which keeps them happy and increases their productivity.
  • Offers his workers education which makes them less prone to mistakes and more capable of their jobs
  • Spends his money on a new house however couldn’t afford his jet this month, however, his business is growing due to his workers being healthy and smart which as a result is making his business boom more then bobs.

The problem with my opponent's attitude is that he/she is acting as though poor people are nothing but parasites and produce nothing of their own which couldn’t be further from the truth.

Another analogy would be that let’s say you have a poor person who was starving to death and dying of cancer, well if you provided them with food and cancer they could, in turn, enter the workforce and contribute or said another way, you give a poor person a sandwich however since now they’re alive they also make sandwiches.

The bottom line is people don’t just drain resources, the more healthy, educated, and abundant workers are, the more people there are to contribute thereby aiding society.

“ Also, you can not set your own prices. The government decides how you sell your own services.”

  • This, in turn, prevents greedy corporations from charging 4,000 dollars for a life-saving drug which only costs 40 dollars to make.

This is exactly why 45,000 Americans die yearly due to privatized healthcare and another 150 million Americans are left uninsured or go bankrupt due to healthcare costs.

“  This completely reduces any chance of me wanting to go to school and earn myself a good job, why not just make pencils in a factory for eight hours and go get free things”

  • Absurd argument to make, by this logic how about we decrease poor peoples working conditions. We make the plumbing horrible, don’t spray for rodents, and keep the windows broken.

We should also get rid of thermostats, tv’s, and computers for them. This way they’ll have a better incentive to work more and get richer.

SOURCES, 




Round 3
Con
Forfeited
Pro
Arguments extended, poor conduct