Unloading the Term "Socialism"

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
--Karl Marx

I'm heartened that things have progressed to the point where an honest discussion about socialism can be had.  Too often, the conflation of socialism with Communism and dictatorship would immediately shut down that conversation.  It's easy to decry the situations in Venezuela or Cuba, and just as easy to ignore where it works, even on a small scale.  It's healthy for us to tackle some of these taboos head on.

First and foremost, I don't view socialism as the government takeover of all industries or the total abandonment of all capitalistic enterprise.  The profit motive is real, and shouldn't be discounted or necessarily discouraged, but it runs amok.  Look at health care.  Look at prisons.  If the profit motive leads to companies selling people opiates, then selling them overdose drugs, then selling them addiction recovery treatments, it should be discarded.  If it leads to judges getting kickbacks for sentencing more people to private prisons, it should be discarded.

That's where the government should step in.  It should fill the cracks in the free market system when the profit motive fails.  Is there a real reason why the government can't house all the homeless?  If the government wanted to pay people to fix up distressed properties so that homeless people could move in and have a chance to get back on their feet, would this really upset anyone?  We already pay for so much asinine BS with our taxes, so let's do some basic good.  Plus doing so would put people to work, at least temporarily, and put roofs over others' heads.  The free market wants to build luxury condos.  I get it.  Make your profit, pay a fair business tax, and let people on a local level take care of those who can't afford them.

The goal of a socialistic society should be to see to the basic necessities of all citizens.  We're the richest people on the planet, but not everyone has a place to live.  Not everyone has access to quality food and water, much less healthcare.  Some people's education is dependent upon the socioeconomic background they were born into.  Others are priced out of higher learning.  Some would rather learn a skill or trade.  The goal should be to find a place for all.  Provide a baseline of services to all.

Consider the state of mental health in the USA.  If we need more psychologists to function better as a society, can't the government step in, recruit people for the profession, and subsidize their education?  Similar to the military, in exchange for the training, the person agrees to work in an underserved area for 2 years, or 4 years, or whatever.  You can do the same with nurses, or whatever the job may be.

I don't see it as controlling the economy.  I see it as supplementing it, directing it when necessary (producing and distributing insulin, for instance; something I think the government should do, Medicare For All or not), and regulating it fairly.  Start with the basics (food, clothing, shelter, utilities, education, wellness) and you can go from there into things like jobs, transportation, internet access for all, and everything else we now consider essential in the modern world.

An American socialism would look unlike anything that's come before.  It would also require getting a lot of unscrupulous out of our government, because it always seems to go awry when regular people get caught up in that profit motive.  It would need to be less in the hands of federal agencies and administered more on a state and local level according to each state's priorities and concerns.  Keep the unaccountable bureaucrats out of it.

Anyway, if you read this far, many thanks.  Look for a post later today about how I would put these ideas to practical use.