Just saw Wolff's part. He seems to be more aggressive here, although I would have wished he would have shortened the co-op shit and focus more on capitalism's inherent contradictions, such as a the falling rate of profit, mentioned how Marx predicted that capitalism has developed productive forces immensely, so it isn't at odds with Marxism.
His weakest point again is that he won't touch socialist experiments, which makes him look weak, because you can criticise capitalism all you want if you don't point to an alternative you'd always have all the burden of proof on you. This is of course not the correct environment to defend the USSR or something, but the answer would have been that all the countries that had socialist revolutions were poor as fuck before, while the first world capitalist countries were already rich as fuck too. So you neee to compare socialist countries like Cuba with other countries on the same economic development and then maybe talk about their growth rates, turns out all things considered they were no South Korea but they did perform above average here too. No need to defend Stalin, Mao, etc. - just put it into historical perspective and the first guy's argument is much weaker.
Also, the first guy said: "Poverty has no causes, only prosperity has" - this is such an outright ridiculous statement that should have been easy to debunk, I hope Wolff does that later.
I'll have to do something now, maybe I watch the rest in a little bit