The socialism vs. capitalism debate is not particularly helpful. Even in the 19th century, the conservative leader of Germany, Otto von Bismarck, proposed health insurance reform as a way to stop growing demands for socialism. The United States might consider that example, rather than fighting so-called socialism tooth and nail.

Since the era of the Great Depression, Western societies opted for what was called a mixed economy, predominantly capitalist, but bringing in some principles of socialism to blunt capitalist excess, which tended to cause economic collapse. The great economist John Maynard Keynes understood that extreme income inequality was very damaging to capitalism, because it caused the level of aggregate demand in the society to fall so low that it could not support continued economic growth.

Most Americans are a paycheck or two from bankruptcy. This is very dangerous. Practical politicians like President Franklin Roosevelt pursued reforms like Social Security and encouraged unionization of the labor force to build the aggregate demand of the citizenry. Roosevelt was called a "traitor to his class." He said: "Government by organized money is as dangerous as government by organized mob." He also said: "If I were a factory worker, I would join a union."

Even before him, his distant cousin Teddy Roosevelt said: "To permit every lawless capitalist, every law-defying corporation, to take any action, no matter how iniquitous, in the effort to secure an improper profit and to build up privilege, would be ruinous to the Republic and would mark the abandonment of the effort to secure in the industrial world the spirit of democratic fair dealing."

Teddy Roosevelt pursued anti-trust principles because he believed that capitalism worked best when there was free and open competition among smaller producers, and that corporations that became too powerful would corrupt government and use it to secure advantages to themselves that would prevent others from competing fairly in the marketplace. The Amazon deal for a headquarters in Long Island City would have been anathema to Teddy Roosevelt.

The United States adopted many economic reforms in an effort to truly protect competitive markets and build a middle class. The social democratic countries in Scandinavia pursued more socialistic policies, yet even in those countries capitalism predominated. Oddly in Scandinavia, it is easier to start a business because you do not have to worry about health care, child care, pensions, university education, etc. One can certainly argue that without some socialism, capitalism becomes a system that is self-defeating, except for those at the top. Our variant of the mixed economy may not have produced as a high a standard of living for the middle class as in some countries, but it did produce the largest middle class in the world.

However, toward the end of President Jimmy Carter's administration, corporate America became restless, chafing under what it felt were undue constraints. The neoliberal demand came to unleash business, which we did, with sadly predictable results — a dramatic rise in income inequality, economic crisis, and a race to the bottom in terms of lost wage stability and benefits for the middle class. While economic indicators have improved, the middle class is not feeling financially less stressed.

Most of the demands of so-called socialists are for policies that do not adversely affect the predominantly capitalist nature of the economy. They are simply reforms designed to strengthen the middle class, which will ultimately lead to a stronger economy.

There is one issue, however, that is potentially transformative: global warming. For too long, products were sold at prices that did not reflect their cost to the environment. The end result affects liberals and conservatives alike. Perhaps this will be the issue that will lead us to rediscover that we need some more socialism to make capitalism work. FDR's famous smile would greet the Green New Deal.