There is nothing better than polite disagreement because at least then both sides have had a chance to be heard rather than just shouting at each other for a long period of time.
I have noticed in the US that the debate about socialism tends to be positioned towards the Communism end - whereas here in Europe socialism tends to be towards the softer end of social democracy. I'd never advocate for communism - it doesn't work and even harder forms of socialism do exactly what you've said and create a huge and burdensome welfare state.
However, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul; when you move towards not helping people on the way up. You'll still pay the costs in taxes, but those will be in law, order and policing. Removing people out of poverty will increase the amount of social loafing (it does here) but it will also reduce the need for street policing and for prisons in the long run. Both methods are expensive but I'd argue that the former makes society safer overall as I can find very little evidence that prisons solve the problem of crime in any meaningful way.
As a liberal, I have no problem with immigration and this is perhaps where we differ. I don't mind the falling birth rate of the Secular UK being plugged by other minority groups - provided they don't impinge on the liberal rights of a western democracy. I see immigration as a form of worldwide socialism - rebalancing the multiple economies of the world and bringing everyone out of poverty. I am under no illusion it is capitalism and technology that fuels the world wide rise in living standards - and so anything which jeopardises this must be treated with caution... but I think entirely free market capitalism may not be the panacea we need.
In order to be useful, money must be moved. If wealthy people wish to sit on large sums of it (and many of them do) then it is not circulating and improves nothing for anyone. If money is congregating in the upper echelons of society then it either needs to move of its own accord or become liable for higher rates of tax.
I'd argue that free market capitalism is what motivates people (and law and order too) but such a system must give them a chance to prosper. Free market capitalism over multiple generations has made the American Dream a bit of a myth. Many people who work multiple jobs will never earn enough to pay for their healthcare, education and housing. When do they have time to innovate and meaningfully contribute? How many of our smartest brains and most innovative thinkers are we missing because they were born into the wrong strata of society. Such people might be attracted by free market capitalism, but they cannot benefit from it as it has become too free.
This has been a fun discussion and we clearly hold different world views, likely born out of our lived experience. These sorts of discussions are exactly the ones I envisaged when I set off on my Penguin quest to argue with absolutely everyone on Medium from the liberal centre ground. :o)
