[1]A very stupid, dishonest and short man wrote:
Francois Hollande’s victory doesn’t and shouldn’t mean a movement toward socialism in Europe or elsewhere. Socialism isn’t the answer to the basic problem haunting all rich nations.
The answer is to reform capitalism. The world’s productivity revolution is outpacing the political will of rich societies to fairly distribute its benefits. The result is widening inequality coupled with slow growth and stubbornly high unemployment.
So say Robert Reich. No one who believes and understands a market economy, would babble about the [state directed] distribution of benefits. Bruce McQuain takes the short one to the woodshed, from Questions and Observations [2]:
And, apparently, the top 1% a) bury the money in cans in the back yard and b) don’t pay 37% of all income taxes collected [3] (the top 5% pay 59%). That’s just not sufficient anymore to keep the bottom 50%, who essentially pay no income taxes, in the lifestyle to which they’ve become accustomed. And Reich thinks that’s wrong. However, and this is the whole point of his pitch, that’s not Socialism.
Really? A “fair distribution of benefits” so neatly defines Socialism, I’m not sure what’s left to say
A market economy produces goods and services, which in turn support the standard of living. A socialist, like Reich, can to see the goods and services because he blinded by envy.