Yeah, I'm back on the socialism kick.
It's pretty obvious that most of the people who get their panties in a wad when they hear the word "socialism" and insist it's a terrible thing have no idea what socialism means, or how much socialism we already have in America. Nor do they understand how important socialism is to our standard of living.
Most cities have a single, government-provided, fire department, police department, and ambulance service. That, folks, is socialism. Do you want to abolish these services and leave it up to each individual to provide this for themselves?
What about flood protection, in the midwest especially? Right now the Army Corps of Engineers builds miles and miles of levees along major rivers to prevent flooding the countryside so each individual home, farm, factory, and business doesn't have to build their own levees and make sure they are properly maintained. That would not only be extremely inefficient, it would be ugly.
I wonder, too, how many anti-government libertarians there are out in Colorado, where wildfires burn hundreds of thousands of acres each year, who insist the government should stop fighting those wildfires and turn the responsibility over to each individual to protect his or her own home. I'm certain many anti-government individuals have had their homes saved because the government paid firefighters to do the dangerous, dirty job of fighting those wildfires. They probably still rant and rave about how terrible it is that the government uses their tax dollars to help the poor, but never give a thought to who pays to fight wildfires.
These are just some examples of socialism in America. When the government provides a vital product or service when it would be impossible or highly inefficient for the private sector or the individual to provide it, that is socialism. It isn't new and it isn't scary.