Is capitalism really the best economic
system? I think buhari should APC should adopt mixed economy or social welfares system but from my own perspective I think social welfarisim is d best for now may be later we can find another means of economy system because mixed economy system lead to capitalist, when am making my research clearly saw that some people in united state also dislike capitalist system, read this
Posted by Madonna Gauding
From the time we were children, we have been
indoctrinated to think of capitalism as the best
economic system on the planet, synonymous with
“freedom and democracy” and even America itself.
Capitalism is the “American way,” and it holds out
the promise to ordinary people, that if they apply
themselves, they too can become wealthy. So, no
surprise there’s a taboo when it comes to looking
critically at how our economic system is organized
and at whom it actually serves. To question
capitalism, or to suggest other economic systems
might be more humane and effective at helping
everyone, is considered deeply un-American.
If there is poverty, we are taught, it is caused by
individual lack of initiative and effort, or by social
problems like racism, or by bad parenting, not by the economic system itself. This view is repeated in
classrooms and churches, and woven into
advertising and media. University economics programs assume capitalism as a given, and
corporate owned media rarely questions capitalism
as a system. Even those who call themselves
“liberal” or “progressive” wholeheartedly support
capitalism. We are taught that this system is
superior because anyone has a chance to make it,
and if you don’t make it, it’s your fault. “Making it” is defined narrowly as making a lot of money and
owning the material possessions that go along with
that. All the other intangibles that make life worth living are left out of the equation. Capitalism creates poverty
In the United States, where we have the “best
economic system on the planet” the level of poverty is startling. We are a country of absolutely
enormous wealth, yet, according to the census
bureau, more than one in every six people in the
United States lives in poverty or near-poverty.
Poverty is defined as living on $23,000 for a family
of four—a ridiculously low and unrealistic figure. It’s
nearly impossible to survive on this without
government subsidies. Here’s a summary of Census data on poverty from Wikipedia:
In November 2012 the U.S. Census Bureau said
more than 16% of the population lived in poverty,
including almost 20% of American children, up from
14.3% (approximately 43.6 million) in 2009 and to
its highest level since 1993. In 2008, 13.2% (39.8
million) Americans lived in poverty. Starting in the
1980s, relative poverty rates have consistently
exceeded those of other wealthy nations. California
has a poverty rate of 23.5%, the highest of any state in the country.
In 2011, child poverty reached record high levels,
with 16.7 million children living in food insecure
households, about 35% more than 2007 levels. A
2013 UNICEF report ranked the U.S. as having the
second highest relative child poverty rates in the
developed world (behind Romania).
When we shift our focus from poverty as caused by
individual failure, and look at the economic system
itself, capitalism’s role in causing poverty is quite
clear. Rather than being designed to provide
economic wellbeing for everyone, from the
beginning capitalism was organized to allow a small elite to control most of the wealth produced by working people, along with the means to produce that wealth—the factories, machinery and tools. The capitalist system as practiced in the United States today, with regulations gutted and tax loopholes expanded, gives a massive share of total wealth and income to a small elite and leaves the remainder to be competed for among the rest of the population. Even mainstream media has
acknowledged that income and wealth inequality
are growing. Core capitalist myth: greed is good
It’s a core myth of capitalism that greed is the prime human motivator, a positive creative force that is justified because the wealth generated will “trickle down” to the majority. That myth persists even though a substantial level of poverty exists in the wealthiest country in the world.
Because the decision of what to produce is driven by considerations of return on investment, the effect that product or service has on the larger society is never considered. For example, corporations create unhealthy food products and contribute to climate change while spreading lies and misinformation to the public to protect profits.
The elite and the politicians who represent their
interests keep telling us that America is the land of
opportunity and that greasing the skids of
opportunity is the answer to income inequality. In
this mythical world, they say they want everyone to
“have a chance,” yet it is a chance in what they, and increasingly the general public, know to be a gamed system.
During the so-called “golden age of capitalism,”
right after the war and up to the 60s, the tax rates
on the wealthy were high and corporations and
banks were regulated. But when those protections
that allowed a middle class to flourish started to be
unraveled, first under Carter, then under Reagan,
Bush and Clinton, the middle and working classes
stated to go under.
Capitalism only considers wellbeing of shareholders, not society at large Capitalism as a system is designed to maximize profits, so it was only a matter of time before the system would assert itself again with force. In that system, and by law, there can be no consideration of the well being of anyone except shareholders. So absolutely everything is fair game, from undermining social programs in order to pay lower or no taxes, to dumping toxic chemicals into rivers, to destroying small businesses in communities, to
keeping wages as low as possible, to producing a
pesticide that destroys bees, to closing factories
and outsourcing jobs to poorer countries, to
spending enormous amounts of money to buy
politicians who, in turn, enact laws that enhance
their bottom line. This sociopathic behavior is
considered rational and normal, and even expected, within the capitalist system. The bigger the SOB you are in the corporate world, the more you are admired and valued.
Given the socially irresponsible behavior of
corporations and their owners within the capitalist
system, it’s no surprise that, in the United States,
one in 6 people live at or near the poverty level or
live in fear of ending up there. Contrary to
conservative views, the poor are not lacking in
initiative or intelligence. Many are working three low
paying jobs to stay afloat. This is what the capitalist
system produces. Poverty happens when behemoth corporations controlling massive amounts of wealth have no responsibility to anyone but themselves and shareholders.
Public debate about poverty focuses on the
individual rather than on the economic system
in which it occurs Public debate about poverty, what little there is, is almost always about the individual. Liberals want to help the individual, to shore them up with public programs, until they can get on their feet and get back into, or join, the capitalist system.
Conservatives, pointing to the failure of government programs like welfare and food stamps to lift people out of poverty, want to gut those programs claiming they cause laziness and dependency. Both liberals and conservatives avoid looking at the capitalist system itself as a primary cause of poverty. Individual effort is a factor in economic and social success, but we all participate in a capitalist system.
Leaving the system itself out of public policy
discussion completely ignores capitalism as a
causation factor in poverty, and allows the myths
and destructive aspects of the system to continue.
It’s time to have an honest discussion about how
capitalism really works, and for whom it works, not
how we imagine it works, or wished it worked. On a
personal level we may have to examine our own
tendency toward greed and our justification and
rationalisation for it. We may find that capitalism,
and the greed and hyper-individualism enshrined
within it, is incompatible with a humane, just, and
compassionate society.


www.occasionalplanet.org/2014/03/06/is-capitalism-really-the-best-economic-system/

Better than almajirin system,of course.

Capitalism & socialism are both not that good.
Report 1 But i'd prefer to live in a socialist country.
Socialism is missing the motivation that capitalism has for innovation and personal gain, but socialism focuses more on keeping every one in the country equal and alive. Capitalism is more for the individual and the people that want to be rich. Neither Socialism or capitalism are good systems, we really need a new system that is better then both

Report 2
Ultimately Yes Capitalism allows for more personal
freedom and awards hard work and innovation.
Unfortunately, with that rewards system comes the
high potential for greed and corruption. Immoral
businessmen propogate underhanded means of
prospering, and making our society very materialistic and competitive. Socialism is ultimately better for most people, levelling the playing field, ensuring the greater good

Report 3
Of course Socialism Socialism provides every citizen of the country with equal resources and serivices like health care, education and security. There are rich people in socialism but there isn't any poverty or unemployment. The country gives priority to it's citizens and their needs. While on the other hand, in capitalism, the government doesn't have much say, and the firms have nothing to do with people's needs. All the firms need are profit.

Report 4
Corporations sell out their jobs to immigrants. It's
cheaper to pay immigrants than actual citizens. Money is all that matters in a Capitalist society corporations use their money to control the media to promote multiculturalism and sacrifice the identity of what was once a wonderful nation. In Socialist societies it's more rewarding to the lower class which after time is eliminated and turns into a massive middle class while the upper class still exists. This in turn results in lower crime rates, national health care and happiness. Also
what happened in Germany before WW2 was workers got bonuses depending on how hard they worked. They promoted hard work they gave away free houses and even automobiles to hard workers as well as massive overtime pay. Also they industrialized Germany as well. Germany was able to sustain itself while still exporting that German automobile companies where exporting 8x more motor vehicles than it was before. This was so
successful that German happiness was at it's peak
because in 4 years 6 million people claimed new jobs and birth rates increased by 22% so that is my case on why Socialism is better than capitalism.

Report Post 5
The invisible hand of the market is inherently
flawed... Money is a tool of the measurement of
value. Therefore, theoretically speaking, wealth should be heavily concentrated in areas considered valuable by the given society. However, in the capitalist system, in an attempt to be a true meritocracy (in which hard work = higher standard of living), is hijacked and manipulated by bankers and investors who move the majority of cash flow, and its relative distribution. The capitalist system then perpetuates an unequal ecology of the concentration of money, which puts the valuable
individuals and institutions (ie. Teachers, medical
professionals, engineers, scientists, etc) at a significant disadvantage then to their manipulative counterparts, who prey on a weak minded culture that devours mind-numbing entertainment, reckless spending credit card users, and students trying to pay their way through school... Capitalism is wrong, and I believe a socialist system would better allocate the nation's money into areas considered valuable, and acquiring wealth would
still be possible... Rich people exist in socialism,
however, poverty is eliminated potentially, at really
only the risk of having too many billionaires...

Report 6
Capitalism can be transcended. Contrary to popular
belief Karl Marx was not anti-capitalist. He actually
praised Adam Smith and thought capitalism was a
great improvement upon feudalism. But the story
doesn't end at capitalism, according to Marx. Like it's predecessors, capitalism could come and go. Consider how a healthy market economy needs growth. Now ask yourself can this growth last forever? Globalization has led to a world saturated with capital. The system is now
struggling to find new investment opportunities for
trillions of dollars. This has led to "rent-seeking", the wealthy manipulating the system to create more wealth for themselves without creating jobs. The result is extreme inequality. Workers wages stagnate or fall causing a demand problem. This problem was solved with credit and people were encouraged to spend outside their means in order to keep the consumer economy alive. This would lead directly to the financial crisis. How long can an increasingly unequal society sustain itself? How far can we keep growing at the expense of the planet? What will happen when labour becomes increasingly automated by robots and software? Collective ownership in the means of production would mean the elimination of the capitalist
class, making society tremendously more equal.
Socialism can save the planet by freeing the economy from the "need" to grow. And under socialism we could be freed of our dependence on wage labour if production can be fully automated.
Posted by: YoungContrarian

Report Post 7
Socialism is better for 4 reasons 5 arguments: 1
Wealth Gap. The main capitalist country, the USA,
suffers from a major wealth gap where in 2011 the top earning 20% earned 50 percent of the counties salary. This means that 80% of the people have to share half of the countries money. 2 Externalities. With a completely free market anything can be sold and to anyone. This means a gun could be sold to a 5 year old. Drugs can be sold and there is no protection from these products. 3. Monopolies. Certain industries control a market and can sell products at any price. 4. Privitization. In capitalism corporations are able to buy any industry no matter what responsibility with the right amount of money. The US has a privitised prison system. Because these companies want the most amount of prophet the US has the most prisoners in human history where they are treated awfully. This can
also happen with other industries. For example water. A vital life supply. The argument that socialism fails due to lack of motivation is invalid as working hard and making the country earn more money may not improve living standards for yourself if all the country works all the people get nice things, facilities and luxuries.

Report 8
I personally think a socialist political system
benefits its citizens more. I believe that socialist
states, even borderline socialist states, such as the
Scandinavian states, benefit their citizens better in
terms of employment, finances and equality. These
countries are usually more free than capitalist
countries and rate higher in the happiness index, too. According to the research I have conducted, these countries are higher on the index because of the services they grant all of their citizens such as free health care, guaranteed jobs, and many more. In addition, as an economic system, socialism functions better than capitalism since there are no class gaps among the classes in the country. I base my argument on the fact that in socialism everyone is essentially equal and have the same rights and financial power, whereas in a free market - capitalism, people are required to work in harsh condition with hard competition in order to have the chance to attempt to grow wealthy, or at least live in acceptable living conditions.
Posted by: IdoZur

Report 10
Socialism is more sensitive to signals of wealth
inequality. Socialism is far superior to capitalism in
telling us that a specific member of the electorate is being left behind and that a gap in the wealth
distribution is widening. Moreover, it provides both the rich and the poor with equal outcomes. Therefore, it is more fair, organized, and political.

Report Post 11
Not old models of socialism, but new ones we
have yet to devise! Anything to save us from the
rapacious and resource-destructive 'free market
capitalism' that is currently destroying the planet. The compassion-free search for bottom line profit; the pandering to the basest of all the possible human motivating forces (ie greed and self-interest); the abstraction that is so embedded that we often fail to see it, ie that the world exists for us to conquer and use for our own ends; and.... Well, already that is a lot of strong arguments against capitalism!!!!

Report 12
History has shown Look at history. All socialist
states/countries limit freedoms of individuals. Take
away incentive to be productive. Take away a chance to become more or better and eventually fail. Look at China. Outside communist. Inside becoming capitalist. I predict they will move to a free market society as more citizens want to be able to have and do more.

Report 13
Of course capitalism is better The amount of
variety that America delivers is outstanding.
Consumers can always pick from what airline they use or what fast food restaurant they go to. This variety is due to companies having the opportunity to compete with one-another. If the government was the only industry supplying a product, consumers would have no options to pick from. Also, no competition would be available. When there is competition, people have personal incentives to increase their amount of supply
and demand. When there is more supply and demand, again more jobs are created and more money is circulating in the economy. Also, more technological advances are proven to occur when there is an increase in competition. For example, the jeep was created by the allies in WW2., along with many other weapons and technologies to help try and win the war.

Report 13
FACTS DON'T LIE No other system has ever
generated an increase in the absolute wealth of a
country and its citizens. People get caught up
complaining about a wealth gap and its increase
through capitalism but fail to realize that the absolute
wealth, even for those at the bottom increases with
capitalism. At no time in history have so many people enjoyed such a high quality of life as they do today in the developed world which is mostly built around capitalism - for example, families or individuals described as poor nowadays can still own two cars, travel abroad at least once per year and own several televisions. All we need to do is look at history to see that capitalism is THE most successful system known
to man even though it still has some flaws. Facts don't lie. People do.

Report 14
Free enterprise Free markets create the incentives to work hard, innovate, invest, and be efficient -- all for a profit. This self organization of the economy creates more prosperity for everyone in it. Business expansion is good. Say a company X has a store A and builds a new store B elsewhere. This new store will require labor to construct, labor to occupy and maintain, labor to create the goods that will go in the store, and creates demand for labor to transport these goods, create the various parts of the goods that go in the store, etc. All
of these mechanisms increases employment and
makes wages rise. Both are good for the middle class. Private investment is the fuel for this and is the reason the economy grows. A growing economy helps everyone as well. Socialism eliminates the incentives to work hard and succeed.

Report Post 15
Hard work is the key to happiness. Although
Socialism has its benefits that you are equal with
everyone else in a monetary sense, you don't have to work very hard for what you get. I believe capitalism is the best economic system because it strengthens the economy and it emphasizes the message that if you work hard enough for what you want you can achieve anything.

Report Post
Ultimately. Uhh, no. Capitalism demands
competition, where if one company improves their
product the competition must as well to stay in
business. Insuring top quality for your dollar, as well as giving a reason for employees to work harder for more money. Now socialism can give the illusion of "fair," but if you, the hard-working individual, gets paid the same amount as this guy, the person who could care less. Why bother trying at all? While capitalism awards those who work hard by increase in payment and possibly eventual promotion. Socialism condemns business, and as you can see, the number of socialist countries is rapidly decreasing. Why? Because capitalism flourishes
by rewarding good work, where socialism. Who cares? I'll get paid anyway.

Posted by: Skylark_Funderberg
Report 17
True Socialism is incompatible with democracy.
There Are no true Socialist States in the world today
they quickly turn into dictatorships this is because
Socialism requires a unified and unquestioned
government thus a dictator ship where freedoms are striped away so that no one can question the
government. The Two really shouldn't be compared
because socialism is both a economic and political
ideology while capitalism is a economic ideology that is usually pared with democratic political ideologies. Socialist ideas such as social security, minimum wage, welfare and unions have been shown to be beneficial to capitalism when use appropriately.

Posted by: Muhly
Report 18
Capitalism is far more advanced regarding
technology! Capitalism is a Economy really focusing on innovation, this means that most of the major goals humanity has achieved regarding technology was done
in a capitalist Country. Too much for something
wouldn't help humanity to develop. It would be terrible if a country was a so called "extreme capitalist country" but also the other way. The DDR also went out of money because they were a socialist party.

Posted by: TheGuyThatKnowns
Report 18
Capitalism is far more advanced regarding
technology! Capitalism is a Economy really focusing on innovation, this means that most of the major goals humanity has achieved regarding technology was done in a capitalist Country. Too much for something wouldn't help humanity to develop. It would be terrible if a country was a so called "extreme capitalist country"
but also the other way. The DDR also went out of
money because they were a socialist party.

Report 19
The socialism is not better than the capitalism In
the socialism there is no competition. You get your
money no matter how much you work. So the people will reduce the amount of work they do, because they are not motivated. This is different in capitalism. In capitalism there is always the threat that you lose your Job, if you do not work hard enough. So the people work more. Also there is more competition in capitalism, because with more success, you earn more money. So the more working of the people lead to more growth
and new inventions. This is good for the development of the country.

KARL MARX’S NOTION OF CAPITALISM
http://www.bravoprojecthelp.com/philosophy/karl-marxs-notion-of-capitalism/