I'm going to repost this link because I made a comment on another Post and it had a typo. And my comments were censored by the other Author. I was blocked from the post. So I'm going to repost it.
In my opinion and what I really meant to say: It's not as if Socialist Democrats dislike money. This romantic idea some people preach about struggling to survive everyday is NOT the way to go. Money is very important. Poverty and inequality are the problems.
Having only a few people that can afford a decent way of living without having to make difficult life decisions such as "should I pay my mortgage or get health insurance" or worst "should I save for retirement or eat all my savings, or try to afford rent or education for my children". Bottom line shark style economies, they only create disparities and more socio-economic problems; because in the end you have an entire society worried about surviving rather than continuing building a sustainable economy. Money is absolutely necessary... Is not a luxury that only a few should afford to have. It is a necessity.
And socialist don't disagree with that, they only want fair distribution of wealth. It's Fine we want more rich people and more middle class, but less poverty. At least that's my point of view. But we want balance, because we don't want to crush the entire middle class so we can support only 2% of the population. We want opportunities for those who want to work. We want affordable housing, healthcare and education, so we don't drown everybody in debt. Simple.
Other options are welcome. I won't censored you for disagreeing.
We have never actually had capitalism in the US even when we were just colonies. Capitalism consists of "small companies that compete with each other" without corporate interference. The colonies were founded by corporations. The only way true capitalism can be present is without government or any business larger than a single store/location once they grow larger capitalism ceases to exist and becomes impossible. Larger business entities create a business environment called plutocracy which gains government influence through money and social power. Once that happens you end up in the same position eventually as any fascist or imperialist country with corporations running the show (this includes churches which are corporate entities and largely unregulated). Socialism is not a form of government it is an economic system that can be attached to most forms of government that aren't overly restrictive which is why the wealthy hate it so much because it empowers people instead of leaving them with all of it.
The real problem in the US is that socialism isn't understood because the rich and powerful propagandise the issue so much. Unions are a socialist institution where people empower themselves by joining together in order to force the rich to treat them with dignity and respect. Many systems have been called socialist which were communist like the USSR, Cuba under Castro, Pol Pot was communist as well. Nazi Germany was the flip side and was fascist which is far right-wing and was a form of plutocracy along with Spain under Franco and Italy under Mussolini who defined fascism as a religion and said that "Fascism is a marriage between corporations and the state." Bernie Sanders defines socialism correctly as "getting something back for the taxes you pay" and that is all it really is. People banding together to get something back for their hard work and the taxes they pay. Social Security is the most popular program in the country and is socialism which is why the political right-wing wants to destroy it so badly....
Adam Smith who first defined capitalism hated the idea of it and called it cruel and evil...
Notice that Andrew Puzder only talked about consumers -- not about employees. He didn't brag about how much he overpaid his employees relative to his competition. It seems to me that before the Civil War he'd be eagerly defending plantation slavery as making possible affordable cotton so that we can have warm and comfortable clothes.