I believe people should pull themselves up by their bootstraps. But I believe they should have boots first. Nice line. The thing about socialism is that it is not, as JS suggested, Risin or Arsenic... if it was the UK would have combusted in 1965-75 at SOME point (and in fact it was booming in the 60s). As has been said many times before, there are dangers inherent in too much socialism... however what say, E_S would have classified as "just about too much socialism" would have been several points past the level by which most on the American right would have disowned thier country and ex-patriated themselves to... er, somewhere. Maybe England in the 1860s. The only thing that's at debate is what should have elements of the economy should have tenants of socialism in them, and what should not. And those are very, very few areas of the Market. Military/police force... Health Care... transportation infrastructure, energy production in some countries... basically, essential services. Most of what we know and deal with is not really up for debate... technology, financial services, entertainment of all stripes, urban and rural construction, funerary services, nearly all manufacturing (even clothing and food production). The noticible difference to the layman on rendering certain of these essential services socialist is negligable. If, for instance, a public option were to be introduced for United States Health Care, the average person is not going to see a change in the quality of heath service, and if so it will be for the better. The high-priced doctors who moved to the US to make more money for themselves are not going to move elsewhere: where are they going to move to? In comparison all the other nations are more socialist than the land they're already living in. If you have the money, you can still hire those doctors. They're not going to mass exodus to Saudi Arabia or something.