Don’t tell me what I’m trying to do.
My point was that some “socialist” policies are not only viable but beneficial. And yes, public waste collection is an example of a very mild “socialist” policy which is beneficial — a purely libertarian government would simply make it the responsibility of private contractors, meaning poorer streets might not have waste collection at all.
Once we’ve established that a small amount of “socialism” can be beneficial (e.g. public waste collection), and that large amounts of “socialism” are lethal (e.g. Venezuela), then we can start figuring out how to hit the best balance.
If you want to insist that only your definition is correct, whatever, but that’s quite irrelevant to the actual issue. If you don’t want to call it “socialism”, we can call it something else.
