More socialist logic

China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Venezuela have all organized their economies around state or Communist Party control of production. All five rank among the world’s most repressed economies and least free societies

South sudan
Sudan
Turkmenistan
Eritrea
Myanmar
CAR
Equatorial Guinea

That tracks; the U.S. has been a Socialist nation since the first federal taxes were levied and we're still doing okay... sort of...

The US governent does not own the means of production. US has private property and a market driven economy.

Thank you for demonstrating you don't know the difference between Socialism and Marxism.

Please explain it to me. What is the difference between Socialism and Marxism?

I'll keep it simple for you:

Marxism is when the government owns/controls the means of production -which is why, if one is truly anti-Marxism, one should be greatly concerned by the Trump Administration taking ownership stakes in U.S. corporations.

Socialism is characterized by group ownership and/or funding. Ergo, if Socialism is always in danger of running out of other people's money and taxes are other people's money, that makes the government of, by, for, owned by the people which collects/spends said taxes a Socialist construct.

Thank you for shining the light, comrade. How can I join the CCP? 谢谢。

Oh but it gets much worse...

Quite frankly, the Socialism aspect of the U.S. runs far deeper than just the federal government and being one of the GOP's favorite scarecrows...

--e.g: the street corner panhandler; giving said panhandler a handout is Socialism at the most basic level. A group of friends pooling their money to buy a thing is Socialism at the most basic level. When the collection plate is passed during Church, that's quite literally institutionalized panhandling -which makes it Socialism. When corporations sell stock, take on shareholders, that's group ownership -which makes it Socialism. GoFundMe, Kickstarter, crowdfunding of any kind -that's Socialism. Police, Fire & Rescue, EMS, DPW, public infrastructure --it's all Socialism.

Just remember: when politicians screech about Socialism and how they're going fight it at every turn, it's all a show; that office they're going for or already hold? Yeah, they're just trying to take or keep a place at the trough.

Here ya go, took a minute to find it but...

7ta48a.jpg (click to show)

Socialism is a broad family of economic and political theories that advocate some form of social, collective, or public ownership and control of the means of production (such as land, factories, and major resources), often with the goal of reducing economic inequality and increasing democratic control over the economy.

Mhmm.

Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, and other communist theories are different currents within the broader socialist tradition. So they are all socialism.

Yes -and, as after-market products, they're differentiated from Socialism 1.0 by the terms "Marxist Socialism," "Leninist Socialism," "Maoist Socialism," etc.

The socialist path is the path to failure. Study history. It is undeniable.

Now explain why Henri de Saint-Simon, who predated all these other socialists/communists today's people look up to, never mentioned goals like 'utopia', 'class warfare', or 'means of production' like future those other socialists and communists do.

Had that been a question rather than a directive, you'd have answered it yourself in the first line.

Neither socialism or communism have reached the final classless society

And they never will reach a classless society. In collective societies the biggest baddest ass-holes always rise to the top. An elite political class forms every time.