: Don't know where that came from, SDF, and not that I'm disagreeing with it, but there is a vast network of government programs which benefit people of all colors and classes. I consider these programs to be socialistic, not communistic or, at the very least, contradictory to laisser faire capitalism.
SDF: Socialism: public control of the MEANS OF PRODUCTION. Government subsidies are not the same thing as government ownership of the factories that produce the things you use.
: An generic example of what I mean is: the widget producers of America have produced many more widgets this year than they did last year. In fact, they've made so many widgets, they can't sell them all, and what they will sell will be for a smaller price. Now what? In steps the Government with its widget purchasing program; supplies on the open market are reduced, and prices remain stable. Is this Government intervention not socialism?
SDF: Yes, that's correct, that's just government economic intervention, it's not "socialism". The government buys stuff and sells stuff, so what, the Roman Empire bought and sold stuff. More specifically, government intervention for the sake of "economic prosperity" has been standard stuff since World War II. Please do read something about John Maynard Keynes, he wasn't a socialist, and I get SO tired of typing at people who wish to disregard the Keynesian era of economic history...