If you don't like socialism, then your complaint should be with Republicans who overplay "socialism"

[Farmer-Rick]

59. Well capitalism died out during feudal times over and over again.

Kings, Lords, royals and Popes would simply come in and scoop up all the profits from any successful business, unless they owned the business like the East Indian Tea Company. Peasants had no incentive to increase their output because they got nothing more for better or swifter production. Lords were not expecting income from markets so that markets did not thrive or expand. There was a period of 200 years were feudalism was stagnate yet capitalism couldn't get a foothold. But a rich Lord would have told you this was the best economic system ever.

If you would have asked a rich slave owner of a cotton plantation if he thought capitalism would ever succeed, he would have said: "It has been tried many times and proves to be a dismal economic failure every time." Slavery ensured capitalist couldn't compete without slaves. Not to own slaves was to ensure the failure of any business because they couldn't compete with the free labor of slaves.

So did everyone suddenly quit trying to use capitalism? I guess not.

Owning stock is NOT owning the means of production. It is merely owning a piece of a corporation. But that does not mean the stock owner can decide what to sell and trade, what to pay low level workers, where to invest profits, how to pay vendors, where to place factories, when to shut down unsuccessful endeavors. The only way to be allowed into the decision making process of a corporation through buying stock is to buy up the controlling shares or majority shares. So, who can afford to buy up controlling shares? Not the average citizen, worker or investor, only the uber rich capitalists.