My son asked me that question a few days ago, and this was more or less what I told him.

The idea behind socialism is actually rather attractive. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." It sounds fair and compassionate, almost utopian. Everyone contributes, and everyone gets everything they need to be content. Right? Let's take a closer look.

First, in a capitalist system, if I am a baker then the bread I produce in my bakery is mine, and I can sell it to anyone who is willing to pay for it. To make more money for my bread, I can raise prices and sell the same number of loaves, or I can increase my production somehow and sell more loaves at the same price. If I can find a way to reduce costs and increase production, then I can sell more loaves at a lower price to make even more money.

The point here is that in a capitalist system, I own the bakery, I own the product, and I get to benefit from my labors. If I do a good job, I get more benefit than if I do a bad job. Under a capitalist system, I have a powerful motivation to always do a better job than I did before.

In a socialist system, I do not own either the bakery or the bread. Those belong to society. Under socialism, the theory is that I should produce as much bread as I can, of the best quality I can produce, and then I just turn it over to be distributed to everyone who needs bread. In turn, I get a place to sleep, a ration of food, clothes, and whatever else the distributors agree that I need.

If I increase production, reduce costs, or both, I do not get anything more as compensation, because it is my socialist duty to do these things. Remember, the concept is "From each according to his ability." So, if I am able to produce more, it is only expected that I should do so. I still only need my ration of food, shelter, clothing, and whatever, and that ration will not be changed because I work harder, or smarter.

It won't be long before I realize that I get no benefit from working harder and producing more, so I will begin to produce less. After all, "To each according to his need." I still need my ration of food, clothing, shelter and whatever, even though I am producing less. I have no motivation to produce more. Why should I work harder than necessary if that work is not going to result in some sort of reward?

Over time, more and more people will see that hard work is not rewarded any differently than laziness. Quality will suffer, production will go down, and shortages will appear because people just do not see any reason why they should work hard, if at all. The socialist system will quickly collapse.

To keep the system going, you now need communism, the government-enforced flavor of socialism. With communism, you have a central committee that decides what everyone needs, and what everyone is able to produce. They have the power to set quotas for each person to produce, and to punish those who do not meet their quotas.

Now, under communism, I have a motivation to work hard again. That motivation is simply the fear of punishment for failing to work hard. I still have no reason to expect a reward for working harder, but I know that I will be punished for not working hard enough. Now, what is another name for a system where people are forced to work but are not allowed to benefit from that work?

If you said, "Slavery," give yourself a gold star.

Socialism is a system where people are forced to work but are not allowed to own or benefit from the products of that work. Slavery is a system where people are forced to work but are not allowed to own or benefit from the products of that work. Socialism is slavery, pure and simple.

The only people who like socialism are the ones who think it will give them the products of other people's labor for free. In other words, anybody who likes socialism really wants to be a slave owner, and those people should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.