'Socialism,' 'welfare state' not same

A lot of people throw around the term "socialism" without having any idea what it means. Socialism has several forms but none entails giving people something for nothing. Usually it plans public ownership of the means of production and giving to each according to their contribution. It assumes there will be no accumulation of great wealth. It has never been tried.

China claims to be socialist or communist but their president that just retired is a billionaire. Russian commissars all became wealthy until they were purged. Those who were not purged were the wealthiest. I doubt that true socialism will ever be tried and I strongly doubt it would work if tried.

There is really no similarity between socialism and the welfare state. According to Wikipedia, "A welfare state is a concept of government in which the state plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the economic and social well-being of its citizens. It is based on the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life."

"Welfare state" may not be as catchy as socialist, but that is what the conservatives fear.

ROBERT ST. JOHN

Manteca