Its extraordinarily simple, so to get it wrong must be deliberate: worker ownership and control of the means of production.

Liberals often do belief in pink fluffy unicorns!

Bollocks! Socialism vs capitalism is about ownership. And markets do not generate clearing prices. The law of one price is typically rejected.

The Nazis maintained private ownership.And price controls are used in all major capitalist economies (e.g. minimum wages). That becomes quite rational when you factor in market failure. Naff all to do with socialism, mind you, which refers to worker ownership.

Nope, to be socialism there has to be worker ownership. You're referring to state capitalism.

If the state sets wages then we have the risk of a prices and incomes policy for inflation control. Then again, socialism would actually refer to worker ownership!

Weird to refer to genocide when the US is actively supporting one...

Might help if you had a clue what socialism meant. Sounds like you think it just refers to redistribution (which all capitalist countries have)

Do you think, if an anti-socialist could define socialism correctly, they'd remain as an anti-socialist? Don't know. Never happened.

Always amuses me to see the slavish celebration of the Milk Snatcher. She quadupled unemployment, made Britain Number 1 for child poverty and created a low skilled equilibrium. Britain still underperforms today because of her ideological stupidity

"Under anti-socialism, validity becomes a crime whenever it threatens the comfort of the herd"

I find it ironic how FEE give Sowell quotes that are very much consistent with RWA anti-intellectualism...

Doubt there are many plastic libertarians who realise communism is a hypothetical evolutionary economic outcome characterised by a classless & stateless outcome. Why bother reading when you can just knuckle drag a meme?

Not true. We can identify over 40,000 slave-owners, tracing their estates and also the compensation that they received. Indeed, we can show how slavery-derived wealth helped build today's family fortunes and institutions.

Still nothing about socialism, mind you.

So you're just rambling about the optimal choice on the economic spectrum. Naff all to do with socialism, mind you.

Feck all economics. What a surprise 🙃

Anti-socialists, mind you, never run out of mindnumbing cliché.

Socialism is worker ownership and control of the means of production. Perhaps ask a socialist, rather than thinking political economy can be understood through a dictionary definition?

There's nothing in basic economics to reject the feasibility of socialism. Those suggesting otherwise don't know basic economics.