Socialism has never been tried.
That wasn't real socialism.
Could these be true, just as we do not have real capitalism today?
The difficulties in this question stem from a misunderstanding of what we want, compounded by a lack of understanding about reality.
What do we want? We don't want to see starving and homeless people.
We would like all the sick to be well, and all the suffering to go away.
And although almost everyone would agree with those "wants", they are not accurately described.
Lets put all the people into stainless steel sleep pods where they are fed intravenously and kept in some kind of computer simulation where they can do pretty much anything they choose. It answers all of those "wants", but somehow it is lacking in compassion. Further, it is missing a vital piece, freedom.
But, if you put freedom into the mix, than you have to allow for starving, homeless, suffering, sick people.
So, what do we really want?
The truth comes about in a really weird way.
What we want is for anyone who wants to be fed to have a way of feeding themselves.
What we want is for anyone who is homeless to build for themselves a house.
What we want is ways for sick people to become well.
But, will this solve starving, homeless, sick people? No.
Further, we have no way, in our current market system to provide this.
There are many people who actually need other people to help them.
And this is where capitalism really breaks down. The root of capitalism is based in a person being able to fend for themselves as long as we create a level playing field.
So, how do we actually square this circle?
One piece that we must add, is that people do not like to have everything done for them. They would like to acquire what they desire with their own hands. They would like to create, to be a part of, society.
However, this is really hard when there are people who need help dressing themselves, let alone doing anything harder. We have people with IQs so low that they cannot do anything constructive by themselves. Even with a supportive person nearby, they cannot relied on to do anything constructive.
How do we help such people? How many other people's lives should basically be used up, to give the helpless a chance at life? And i don't mean one person, i mean several people's efforts, their entire life's work is just spent supporting someone else.
First there is the caretaker. And that caretaker needs food provide for them and the person being cared for. So, that is two people, who's lives are being used up to care for the one invalid. The only blessing is that with modern farming, a single person can grow an abundance of food. That one skilled person can create a lot extra.
And, it is because of this extra that we can even discuss this.
It wasn't Stallin's plans or misallocations that really killed lots of people, the real killer was in the very beginning. The people where upset at people having more than others. One of the first groups of people for the purge, was those "rich" farmers. Russia killed off the farmers... i guess they though anyone could grow food. Which turned out to be wrong, and many, many people starved to death. (look for a repeat in Southern Africa)
So, how many people, what percentage of the population do we allocate for taking care of a portion of the population that can't ever fend for themselves?
Most of the socialist talk is about ending suffering. We do not want to see any more suffering.
But as Buddhists will say, life is suffering.
So, the socialists will have to grow up and learn to allow suffering.
However, there is a lot of unneeded suffering. Where food is thrown out in one place while people starve in others. Where food is withheld/destroyed to keep food prices high.
And to this, the greatest invention of mankind will be to return to almost everyone being farmers.
With the advent of the internet and automation, we have no need to stay in large cities. The cities are no longer a guarantee of work.
What we will see instead is groups of people building farms and a cottage industry. The cottage industry is to have something to trade, to barter. However, most of their food will come from their own hands, in their own soil.
Fortunately, with all the helpful tools we have made (water on tap, being a huge one) we can each live quite comfortable lives with not too much effort growing our own food.
And, these communes, or families, or tribes solve the other problem. These groups will decide how to handle those who need help living. The person, who would become a homeless bum, now cannot be ignored. It is a real person, among another group of real people who have to actually take care of them. (or use one of the more harsh solutions)
In the end, what the socialists want is not something a govern-cement can ever give them.
The only thing a govern-cement can do is to take from some people and give it to some others, which has ALWAYS ended up with a lot of people starving. It is inevitable. You kill the people that are the productive (via disincentiving or by actually killing) and you will no longer have enough.