... this article by Mike Collins from Forbes--which is hardly a socialist-friendly magazine as I'm sure you know!--points out clearly that things have not gotten better for workers, let alone those who comprise what pundits often call the "middle class," as American capitalism has gotten more unregulated.

And this is coming from a supporter of capitalism! Interestingly, what he calls for as a solution is a "compromise" in the same form as many European nations, which is what he correctly identifies (to his further credit) not as "socialism," but social democracy. He has the correct idea of the type of system I'm fighting for, without the intellectual dishonesty I see emanating from here and many other places when this issue is broached. He thinks both unregulated capitalism (which libertarians favor) and the total abolition of a market system altogether (which I favor) are both "absolutist" extremes, albeit in opposite directions. He personally believes social democracy is a good compromise.

Clearly, we both disagree with him, but the important thing is, he clearly identifies regulated capitalism as being necessary to save the system, not destroy it. Most importantly, though, he doesn't put the narrative before the facts and seriously try to argue that unregulated capitalism would give better upward mobility or a thriving working class.

He identifies, btw, as a compassionate conservative (didn't you once identify similarly?), and he recognizes unregulated capitalism, or even the poorly regulated version we have now in America, as lacking any type of compassion.