Capitalism need not be its stereotypical image of a brutal, exploitive sweatshop that bleeds workers and consumers dry and benefits only a tiny class of financial aristocrats and their middlemen flunkies. This is the only definition of capitalism accepted by extreme socialists. Socialism need not be its stereotypical image of a teeming hive of identical workers struggling for survival under the watchful eyes of brutal soldiers and a soulless queen. This is the only definition of socialism accepted by extreme capitalists. I reject both, and all those who promote these ideas.

No, my vision of socialism is exactly as you described it, and that's why I am so opposed to it:

SOCIALISM: a system where democratic, constitutional institutions provide a framework of law and regulation to prevent Capitalism from its inevitable abuses and instabilities, while encouraging its productivity, flexibility, competitiveness and innovation.

(Emphasis added)

The entire framework of socialism is designed to restrain capital, put a chain around the producers necks and redistribute wealth to the noble poor, who are entitled to such wealth. Naturally, the poor keep electing the socialists to public office with such a system. Likewise the fastest way to public office is by pandering to those who cannot provide for themselves by their ability and demand that their incompetence be compensated.

The "inevitable" abuses and instabilities naturally regard any imbalance as unjust.

This is where socialists' whole premise is invalid.

There is no such thing as injustice in a free market.

A free market responds to conditions and competition. Wages are dictated by value not some arbitrary idea of "justice". If the producer does not value his employees, and exploits them, the poor individual in a free market, has the opportunity to work elsewhere.

The exception is the slave.

The slave still exists, it's just now he is called an "illegal immigrant" or "guest worker" or some other idealized euphemism. Those who favor "guest workers" are favoring a form of slavery. Period. Happy slaves or unhappy slaves, it makes no difference to the system. This is "justice" in the eyes of the socialist, who sees such as "justice" for the "people who have no other opportunities".

The producer, unchained, grows in leaps and bounds. They produce wealth. In the US one is not chained to the "labor" class, which requires only a pulse and some muscles, but the laborer can educate himself and compete with other producers.

The taxation system, as a form of redistributing the wealth produced by producers in excess of the cost of services provided to the producer, is insane. It cripples production and lowers wages for labor and profits for the producer. It curtails growth and the production of greater wealth.

The only chain that capitalism ever needs is the monopoly busting antitrust provisions. And that doesn't loot the producer, it provides for steady competition, which in the long haul benefits the producer by sustaining the production of wealth.

Socialism is sold to the masses who succumb to either guilt and/or ignorance. By believing it is the responsibility of as government to provide "economic justice" it forever caps the growth of such a nation and contrary to popular belief enslaves millions and indentures them to such things as a "minimum wage". Yes, socialism is the enemy of wealth and prosperity. It is not a friend of the poor - it is an enslaver of the poor and to the degree one finds socialism in laws - the masses will suffer just as surely as if slavery was never outlawed.

Class warfare, and perpetual class enslavement, is the default byproduct of socialism by decree. The more socialism takes hold in the law, the poorer the nation becomes and progress of all kinds is burdened to the yoke of an immoral "social conscience".

In a nutshell, socialism is not born of compassion and goodness but is born of greed: It is the immoral belief that one man has the right to live of the efforts of another.

If you cannot see how such is immoral, you will applaud socialism. If you can you will find it abhorrent.