Off the top of my head: It is the nature of any money-based system that everyone pays in some measure for everyone1 else. The first "everyone" always means everyone; the value of the second "everyone1" varies according to the particular system involved, but it's always the goal of those in that group to keep it as small as possible, because that means they get more each. The ideal of socialism is that the second "everyone1" equals the first "everyone", but nobody's made that work yet as far as I know.
In other words, it's never a case of whether you have socialism, just of how much and who benefits; the people who need it, or the ones at the top who don't.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
In other words, it's never a case of whether you have socialism, just of how much and who benefits; the people who need it, or the ones at the top who don't.