I'm not sure I agree with that characterization of socialism - because I don't think the rich are better people than poor are. Many wealthy people deserve their success, don't get me wrong - but many also inherited it, or for whatever reason had more advantage than others had, whereas many people who end up poor would have become successful if they had started out with more advantages. (I mean how would someone with Romney's and Bush Jr.'s intelligence/drive -- I'd describe them both as average in that department -- fare if not for the family connections?)

My instinct about socialism is it takes away the incentive to work hard, which means everyone suffers. There you and I agree - the size of the group makes so much difference! I think a lot of this comes down to what you mean by that word and I want to read some of the books Dwim suggested downthread. But even though my instinct right now is there are other, better theories - I still don't think socialism is infantilizing. If anything it's more empowering than relying on the boss or government to pay you. In my opinion, at least.