I'm not aware that the 'left wing' as a whole 'hates' being called 'socialist' in the US...though many would point out that the word is being used incorrectly much of the time when used in the US.

@DA. you are correct there are a few small parties with socialism in their name, but they are very much a tiny minority. With that said, parties aren't people, and people aren't parties. But political parties, particularly successful ones, are pragmatic.

Probably because the word "socialist" has gotten a bad connotation in the states. For example if you hate affordable health care you call it "socialized medicine".

There's also the issue that the Democratic Party isn't socialist. It's at best aligned with social democracy, but I'd hardly call it leftwing socialism, especially compared to European socialist parties.

@TheForestAndTheTrees But the point is that the French “Parti socialiste” is not socialist in the least, it is very much a mainstream social-democratic party like others in Europe. Incidentally, even “social-democrat” used to mean something entirely different that does not apply to the US Democratic Party at all.

@Relaxed: The Parti socialiste is not socialist? Get real. They are as bad socialist as it can get. Promising everybody riches, then raising taxes (even in 2014, after having said "no new tax in 2014" in december 2013), making everybody poor (especially making the poor poorer), driving the rich (and their money!) out of the country with insane taxes, and giving away government-owned equity (autoroutes, buildings) away in masses, usually to a party member's cousin or such, for a low price. Why do you think Hollande is the most hated person in France? Because he is a perfect socialist.

@Damon It seems obvious you don't know much about France or socialism. For starters, “giving away government-owned equity”, aka privatisation is the exact opposite of socialism. Incidentally, the privatisation of the motorways was the previous (right-wing) government's doing, which shows the level of your confusion. I certainly don't want to defend either Hollande or socialism but it is just absurd to call all this “perfect socialism” or to think that a small tax increase is “as bad as it can get”.

I'll take the A63 as an example, since that is one which affects me personally. Built with tax money, southern half given away to a private company (for free) in 1984 by Mitterand/PS, and northern half given to the same private company in 2013 by Hollande/PS. How is that the doing of the "previous (right-wing)" government? Small tax increase, such as doubling the TVA on food, and raising it by 2% on non-food? Small tax increase such as 75% on incomes over 1 million? Cigarettes going up by how much, 3€ in 3 years? (I don't smoke, but 1/3 of the French do, and mostly the "poorer" third).

It's a PR campaing to not use the word socialist or to use the word as an insult. The states has a history of minimal government, there are still a lot of people who like the ideas their founding fathers. They might use progressive (that was, in the past, "seen as bad" like the word socialist) or liberal.

@Damon That company was state-owned until 2005 (and all French motorways have been built that way…). But seriously, that's completely beside the point, I am not defending any of this, I am just saying this is small potato and has really nothing to do with the concept of “socialism”. Same thing for the 75% top tax bracket, it was pretty common all over the world (even the US had a 70% tax bracket not so long ago) and it's really not that big a deal. You can be for it, you can be against it but you can't seriously claim it's “insane” or anything more than a modest reformist agenda.

@johny:Actually if you hate "affordable health care" then you call yourself a democrat. They love the ACA which has raised millions of people's healthcare costs by 250% or more. What we had before was affordable, now it is just ridiculous.

Sigh. I should have realised this question would trigger a flame-war eventually. But it started out so peaceable...

The Democratic Party not only isn't socialist, it isn't left wing in any way. While it does have a progressive or center-left background (although it has a pro-slavery background if you go back even farther…), its mainstream platform has been equivalent to that of centrist and center-right parties in most of Europe for decades now.

@Dunk rgj.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/05/… given those figure I strongly doubt an increase of 250%

@user:Well your doubts are absolutely 100% incorrect. I know of several hundred thousand families whose healthcare costs went from about $3500 per year to over $10000 per year now. That's just people in my industry. I'm certain other middle class workers are in the same boat. If you want specifics....2009 healthcare premiums for family = $129 every 2 weeks with no deductible = $3354 per year. Costs for 2015 for family = $339 every 2 weeks, $3000 deductible(1500 paid by company) = $10314. An increase of 207%. That doesn't include less is covered and going from 90% to 80% copays to get to 250%.

@user:I find it laughable that your story is using a KNOWN LIAR "Gruber" as a credible source. I also find it laughable that the study insists that more is covered in the new plans when that is absolutely not true. I have far fewer things covered than I did a mere 5 years ago. I also like how they prefer not to compare coverages now versus before because that would make their numbers look bad. So they cherry-pick to support their agenda and totally ignore reality in the process.

@Affable-geek you might want to shunt this commentary into chat; it's gone off-topic.

@Dunk forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/… American health care is the laughing stock of the world and we're all in perpetual shock that large portions of you all not only put up with it but seem to think it's a great idea.

@LateralFractal - you didn't anticipate a flame war out of using squishy and ill defined (never mind my favorite "single-dimentional" rant) terms like left and right wing?

Laugh all you want, but when people get sick the USA is where they want to come to be treated. The Pre-ACA system was a great idea. Prior to ACA 85% of people were happy with their healthcare plans. Of those w/o insurance 10% were young and didn't want health insurance. That left 4-5% w/o insurance. Their fault. In the USA I could pick up the phone and be in the Dr office in an hour. Not so in your more wonderful systems. In the USA everyone who will pay their bill is treated equally. In europe, the rich get special care via private doctors, everyone else is just a number with few options.

I'm not saying the pre-ACA system couldn't be improved dramatically, but you can't get 85% of the people to agree on anything. Probably not even the color of the sky. And yet, 85% agreed that they liked their current healthcare options. That's not something that should be laughed at, it is something that should be more closely emulated. ACA didn't fix anything, it just broke stuff that was already working for the most part. A tweak here and there would have done wonders, instead the libs chose to break the system instead and then proceed to lie about what they did.

A suggestion: Do us a favour and change your username to something more telling than "user1234".