>SNIP
>I guess you would agree with me that the same countries have elements of capitalism, i.e. it is mixed. My following question is: "Do you agree that this mixed situation is fluid, i.e. at some country/time point socialist elements prevail, while in another point capitalist elements prevail?"
>
>There is no such thing as 'Capitalist' versus 'Socialists' elements in a wrangle who will win / overtake ...
>
>When you take it to the very end, TAX is a form Socialisam. Ultimately if 'Capitalists' win, they would
>abolish themselves from paying any taxes to maximise profits right ? Well, part of that struggle even nowdays is to declare 'Socialists' as someone whou would increase tax to abnormal levels (used to be '...They will come and take your House and Car away !!! ...) just so they can squander all that money through social programs etc.
>On the other hand, quazi-socalisam in the past (Eastern Europe) indeed have taken people's houses away and later
>squandered people's money and degraded or even colapsed countries in some cases, - on a pretense of having just society by default.
>
>Hopefully, all this is now dark history.
>
>This is as I said 21st century. Every country (except maybe Cuba and North Corea) have nowdays private initiative ('Capital' without 'ist') as cornerstone of economy. (Hence, even communist China discovered that 'black cat' catches mice of all colors... {g} )
>
>Likewise, many economically developed, market oriented economies became also more socialy developed
>(or civilised if you wish) , and discovered value of having fine balance between strong economy and developed social programs.
>Just like everything else, political power is also to be shared more evenly between various grades of left and right, with parties trully competing in a open political marketplace just like companies are competing in an open market.
>
>Rather then one side of political spectar pursuing total political domination through drone parties (political cartel / deadlock),
>Idea is for society to be a main benefactor of civilised political 'struggles' between various political orientations, that by all means
>include strong socialist parties. Isn't it what they call - real democracy ?
>
>Not everything is perfect, but this is direction that Europe has taken long time ago. I don't know if this is where Obama is
>trying to get you, (he have to get you out of financial mess first) but if this is on his mind, then he is NOT on the left but on quiet good, or if you prefer right track :)
>I wish you every luck getting there.
>
>Cheers :)

European model is nearing the end, because it has exhausted internal resources, first of all, human initiative. Socialism can feed on other people wealth (and other resources), but it does not create it. European lifestyle was supported by capitalist elements still preserved in some places. Take them out and you will move to purer forms of socialism, that some historical revisionists may conveniently consider extinct.
In regard to financial mess, I read in news (not in "right-wing") than many European countries including quite "successful' Ireland, Italy and Greece are very close to national defaults. I guess that Cypris is not far behind. How could it happen that so mighty system fell that low? Another American fault?