Again, that is NOT socialism. There is nothing intrinsic in socialism that requires welfare or social security. Although I think that welfare in some cases benefits all of society, it's not required by socialism. Conversely, there is nothing to stop a conservative government maintaining a welfare system if it keeps the exploited workers from questioning their "position in life". Some socialists would oppose social security, because it's like a drug that keeps the workers from unrest.
However there is one aspect of welfare that is intrinsic to socialism, and that it does not allow welfare to go to the filthy rich. For example it would have stopped the huge amount of corporate welfare - tax payers money - going to Australia's richest woman.
Once again, you seem to have no clue what socialism is, and you really should do some proper research before you dismiss it.