Dave, a lot depends on how you define “capitalism.” Contrary to common opinion in United States and Canada, “capitalism” is not tantamount to “free enterprise.” If it were, I would be fully supportive of it!
Is it your understanding, Dave, that the two are synonymous? If they were synonymous, then what did the Social Credit Party of Canada mean when they declared that were a free-enterprise party but not a capitalist party?
Consider the following definition of “capitalism”:
A system in which private or corporate wealth (capital) is used in the production and distribution of goods resulting in the dominance of private owners of capital and production for profit in such a way that wealth (capital) becomes concentrated in the hands of a minority.
Isn’t that precisely what has happened in United States? A few billionaires and multi-billionaires owning the “lion’s portion” of the wealth, while millions live in poverty?
Also, I think we should be clear what we mean when we use the word “socialism.” In its purest form, socialism is a political, social, and economic system meant to empower the working class. It is not a system in which the government owns and controls all industry and means of production; that’s Communism. It is true that socialist countries tend to tax citizens heavily so that there is provision for the poor. How else could such provision be made? Socialist countries also provide such services as “free medical treatment.” Canada is one of these. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that in United States many people, have gone broke after paying or trying to pay their heavy medical bills.