1) The current insurance company-based system is held up by government regulation; altering it would likely reduce government intervention in the economy.

2) I don't understand how government reducing their backing of student loans is "bigger government". Could you explain that?

3) I agree that improving infrastructure is bigger government, but it is widely seen as an acceptable role for government, not "a manifestation of a communist/socialist society." On the other hand, "pushing back against overly aggressive zoning laws" is clearly the opposite of bigger government.

In addition to all this, your statement that "all of those are manifestations of a communist/socialist society" needs an explanation for why this matters. Why is it necessarily true that a manifestation of a socialist society is a bad thing?

When americans are discussing politics they are always missing the point. At least from the outside perspective.

It's like two parties arguing about football. One side is saying, we need to abolish referees, the players should sort problems out themselves. The other party is saying the referees need more power and instruments in order to better control the game.

The simple truth is, people need to make sure that the referees work for them and not for the individual players who hand them the most money.

So are roads, public schools, corporate subsidies, social security, medicare/medicaid, unemployment insurance, food stamps, WIC, and federal student loans. Yet here we are, not collapsing under our already-heavy socialist burden. Also not collapsing under heavy socialist burden: most of Western Europe.

America has a long and proud socialist tradition. It'd be a shame to stop now.

You want a communist resurgence? Because decoupling wages from productivity is how you get a communist resurgence.

sounds about right