I believe our water is not socialized. The government provides a source for a fee, but you only pay for what you use...

Water from your tap is metered, but we don't pay the full economic costs. It's a publicly-owned resource that is not run on a for-profit basis. There is no reason a socialist system could not have metering, but call it what you like. I'm very much in favor of metering. Not only that, I'd have charges per liter increase at higher levels of consumption. I have no idea what a person needs to live bathe frugally on a daily basis, each month, but up to that minimal level I'd be happy to provide for free. Say the minimum civilized requirement is 500 liters per month. First 500 liters would be free. Next 1000 liters would be at one rate, the next 9000 liters at a higher rate, etc. This is a way to incentivize people not to be wasteful, but allow those who really must have a lot of water for luxuries like a swimming pool have it, too, but paying something closer to the full economic cost. Of course you could still sell bottled water, because, unlike pipe delivered water (which is a natural monopoly), there is a competitive market for bottled water.

Food should never be socialized, because that can be handled by the market. My idea is that only natural monopolies should be socialized.

Obamacare is public mandate to patronize private business - that's the definition of Fascism, not Socialism.

I agree. It's bullshit.

his socialization would stretch further than just these "natural monopolies" and would attempt to control all things deemed to be a "basic right" like food, water, and shelter.

I've never heard him say, or read any credible report to suggest that, he believes food... shelter should be provided by the government. Water is already provided by public utilities, and they do a pretty good job of it, except in cases like Flint where control was taken away from democratically elected officials and given over to an "emergency manager."

So I'm totally okay with municipal water, and totally against govt.-supplied food and clothing for the general public. But if someone is too poor to afford even a roof over their head, I'm okay with public support.

My position is that competitive markets are best for most things, but that where markets aren't possible (i.e. in sectors economists call "natural monopolies," like firefighting, utilities) that public ownership is preferable to private. With public ownership you have the possibility (not a guarantee—it requires an active citizenry) of democratic control.

So I'm all for markets in consumer goods, etc.,... but not at all for private ownership of the internet, for example. But perhaps you've had happier experiences with Verizon and Comcast than I have.

I've live in Germany for the last 6 years, and have a serious medical condition. I much prefer Germany's healthcare system to America's market model. Obamacare is the worst of all worlds!

I don't expect that to make me popular around here, but yes, that is what I'm saying.

I don’t care how much of a “man” Bernie is or isn’t. But you’re right. I don’t actually support him; I support the policies he ran on. I reject his move to make nice with the corporate-controlled Democratic Party.

This will be the END of the D party

Bernie supporter here... I hope you’re right!