Then left view of socialism is that socialism equals fairness and equality?
And...
And then I think from there the sort of organizing principle of democratic socialism is to move as much of the economy as possible under democratic control. So, to return control of the economy to the people at large instead of a small number of super rich people.
Deconstructed Podcast: Who’s Really Afraid of Socialism?
My question is how do you propose to accomplish this?
In my view, we can have either fairness or equality, not both. While you can have a compromise between the two, you have to decide which has priority at least.
Fairness, those who work more, invest more, take more risk should receive greater compensation.
Equality, the state of being equal. Maybe this work in a legal sense, well not really, but ideally, justice should treat everyone equal. However my life will never be equal to that of a Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. Economically, socially I don't see how fairness is achievable.
In my view, capitalism is as close to "fairness" as we can possibly get. In tossing out capitalism we also toss out any chance of fairness.
I think that history demonstrates quite clearly that capitalism has a very, very strong advantage in terms of economic development. Not everybody is prepared to invest, to take risks. But if there were no benefit to do so, even those who might be prepared would have little reason to bother. The history of communism around the world has made that abundantly clear.
And I certainly think that those who do invest, who do take risks, who do innovate, who hire other people and bring economic growth to communities large and small, are deserving of reaping the benefits of doing so.
But our societies are too large, too diverse, and need people at every stratum, and at every skill level, to prosper. But these same societies also depend on the well-being of everyone, sometimes even those who can no longer contribute, because they will suck time and energy out of others who will then be required to care and provide for them. This is grossly over-simplified, but it is for this reason that I see the need for a layer of social protection, provided not "at will" by charities, religions, families, etc. (which in a complex world can't do it as they once could when we lived in little communities of dozens or hundreds).
And since we all benefit (even businesses) from the well-being of everyone, then I think that we should all be required to do our bit towards that end, which now, in our much large societies of cities, states, provinces and nations, essentially means taxation. I don't approve of notions like "tax the rich" per se, but I do favour the idea of
progressive taxation, that is higher rates for higher earners, on a scale that still allows those that contribute most to keep most, but also pay tax according to their ability.
That's the "socialist" side of me, which remains capitalist. That said, I also support government regulating what business can and cannot do just as they do with individuals. I'm not allowed to beat up my neighbour, and I would hope that business would not be allowed to poison our environments. That seems reasonable, doesn't it?