That's wrong. The definition of Socialism is NOT that it's a government that does something, anything.
By this definition we're hard-core socialist now - I mean, we have government-issued money and everything.
Neither is the economic plan outlined in the article quoted in the OP, and yet we still have this thread.
That plus the military - I mean, they even have their own government run stores and health care.
As opposed to what - our current system where unlimited medical services are easily available to everyone at a low, low cost?
Its also an economic system that has no connection to the plan laid out by President Elect Biden, no matter how hard you try to read the entirety of Das Kapital or What is to be done? in to one commonly used phrase.
But enough about our farm subsidizes.
Right, so we're back to where we always were--that "socialism" is just a word that means giving your hard-earned tax dollars to people whose lifestyle choices you disapprove of.
Like multi million dollar farming operations, oil companies, coal companies, oh wait thats different because, reasons.
That mistake is what I was attempting to address in the previous post. The definition of Socialism is not "there is some government in existence."
Using your definition of communism, I don’t see how “handouts” to the disadvantaged is automatically communism. It does not require the government to collect all production and distribute it equally. We give people “handouts” now, under a clearly capitalistic system.
