[WBrentWilliams]

I had to re-check what I said. I said alternatives to markets that create externalities. These are, in fact, markets. They just don't dump costs off the books.

That said, I agree. No "socialist" economic system has been able to not have markets. This is exactly my point: trying to implement a "pure" form of "socialism" is a foolish game. Much like trying to implement a "pure" form of "capitalism" is a foolish game.

Much better, to keep torturing metaphors, to allow iron to sharpen iron. The best outcome is achieved, I think, by allowing the debate to endlessly continue.

[jancsika]

Unfortunately for you, we live in the world where "socialist" anything is the work of evildoers in the minds of many older Americans. So you're going to have to choose a different word if you want to be not only understood but also to avoid reflexive contrarianism.

May I suggest "Overton window?" It's scientistic enough that you could overload it to your use of "socialist" here. E.g., "We need to shift the Overton window to include C suite diversification." You won't get instead comprehension. But you'll at least get heads nodding instead of old grumps yelling their fears at you.