Social Welfare is Not Socialism

I was talking to my dad yesterday about the fact that Republicans love to use the term socialism as a negative label.  Bernie Sanders and others don't do themselves any favors by using the term socialist as a badge of honor.  Does either side know what they're talking about?  Is anyone truly talking about changing our entire economic system to one that functions in a truly socialist fashion?  And, what does that actually mean?  Are all socialist countries made equally?  Are the naysayers being critical of socialist societies that are totalitarian in nature?  Are any of the presidential candidates supporting a totalitarian government?  Of course not!  Is there a difference between social welfare and socialism?

It strikes me that so-called liberals want to make sure that those who are less fortunate than others, whether by birth or happenstance, are not held down at the bottom of society.  We, after all, have never held ourselves out to be a country with a caste system.  America has always been about opportunity and the hope and dream of anyone to be whatever they can,  In reality, we know, that these hopes and dreams are not always possible for many who are born into poverty and don't receive the necessary opportunities to advance.  Some raise themselves up from their bootstraps, but others are just unable to do so.  What about children who are raised in poverty who are killed by rampant inner city violence?  What democratic opportunity were they able to avail themselves to?

I read today that if the minimum wage was adjusted for inflation, it should be over $22/hr.  How do we expect people to survive at one third of that?  I've written a lot about the incredible human beings who work on the front lines of nursing homes, earning less than a living wage.  We want grandma to be well taken care of in these circumstances, but do we care if the people who care for her have to work two jobs in order to make ends meet.  What does this do for the nuclear family?

Is it socialism to try to help those at the bottom?  What if the goal is to equal the playing field a little, so everyone can compete in a capitalistic society?  Is that socialism.  Or, in fact, is it a form of social welfare? Are they the same?  I would posit that if businesses function in a free market manner, we are not socialists.  I for one believe that individuals need incentives to succeed and to be encouraged to accomplish things.  I'm not a fan of giving things to people for free.  If we're going to equal the playing field, one should have work attached to obtaining that equality.  In fact, it may not be social welfare that I'm talking about, but social workfare.  Unfortunately, instead of debating these types of issues, the Republicans want to label others as socialist, so there is no discussion.  On the other hand, Bernie Sanders and the like want to proudly promote socialism as a ding on those who succeed under the capitalist mantel.  It's time we all work together to accomplish what America is all about  We're a country that believes in individuality an opportunity.  It's also a country with a heart.