Those were also provided upthread. I quoted an excerpt from the OP article:
Oh? So does that mean you're retreating from your earlier position that socialism is an "either/or" condition? You keep saying that countries like Denmark and Sweden are capitalist, even though they have socialized medicine and other benefits Americans do not have.
Not to the extremes we have in the U.S.
It's also based on their stated purpose and motivation. A socialist wants to make life better for all. A capitalist only wants to make life better for "me." It's all about "me, me, me" with capitalists (and then we wonder why all these younger generations feel so entitled and narcissistic). Socialists think about "us."
Well, ultimately, that's what it comes down to. It's just someone's opinion of what someone believes someone or something is "worth."
Just for fun, I looked up the estimated values of the painting "Dogs Playing Poker" and the "Mona Lisa." I found that "Dogs Playing Poker" was sold at auction in 2015 for $658,000. (
Dogs Playing Poker - Wikipedia) The "Mona Lisa" appraisal in 2019 dollars was $850,000,000. (
List of most expensive paintings - Wikipedia)
I'm sure that an art aficionado would be able to explain
why there's such a huge difference in value between these paintings. To me, "Dogs Playing Poker" is the much better painting and should be worth more, but I'm not an art buff. I'm such a low-brow type that the artsy-fartsy people point and laugh at me.
But the professional art appraiser might look at various factors and should be able to come up with something. At least, one can expect a detailed explanation as to
how they reached their opinion of what something is worth. It would still be subjective, but at least it would have something of substance to back it up.