That makes sense. So in socialism, would the state be likely to own Apple and Microsoft?
If the USA nationalized the computer industry, yes. Again we're sort of getting back to the question of how we define socialism. In a totally socialist state, every business, every activity would be owned and controlled by government. I don't think that has ever happened anywhere, but you don't have to go very far down that road before things get very unpleasant. If you don't look at it as an all-or-nothing question, there are degrees of implementation. Some countries, for example, have socialized medicine but are in other regards non-socialist.
Right on smscotten,
I do find it curious how many get sucked into rabid negativity with the concept of socialism, while simultaneously being blind to many socialist pillars they peruse everyday, to great benefit to capitalism, and most find very agreeable.
You mentioned socialized defense, roads/bridges and other infrastructure. Of course, one can extend this to US justice and penal system, banking system (the Fed, FDIC), farming industry, food & drug quality control, air, land & water traffic control, and countless other endeavors have all been socialized for many, many years, as the better and most cost-efficient practice of providing reliable and credible services and protection to citizens.
By exempting from taxation money flowing to religious organizations, US citizens have also agreed to socialize organized religion.
Yet, this radioactive reaction to additional socialism doesn't land with certain people in the same hypocritical light as those that are able to consider socialism without the filter of the "communist" baggage of the Cold War.
Somehow, any additional aspect where it's proposed as area that fits well for a socialist solution, aha! that is the area that will create a slippery slope and sink the universe into an orgy of Nazi proportions.