The continued reference to "socialism" here is a strawman. The discussion started with pembrook's complaint https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45512714 and then had j-krieger explaining how the system works starting with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45513552 . At no point did either person describe the system as "socialism". j-krieger was even explicit in referring to "'Social market economy'... a regulated market economic model [,] designed to sit exactly in the middle between laissez faire capitalism and socialism". But interlocutors continually insisted on dragging it back to "socialism" simply because j-krieger denied that it was "capitalism", applying a false dichotomy.

What you, mfru and dns_snek did here is not respectful, open-minded discourse and I'm amazed that j-krieger put up with it that long.