Ironically, it's probably more accurate to call the ACA more socialistic than Medicare-for-all. This doesn't mean I'm not a fan of certain socialistic elements. It's probably okay for government to regulate certain things in business. I guess you could say that's socialistic, but it's problematic to say if we do that, we're now in socialism or communism

I think looking at the ideologies in these nuances doesn't help anybody. Virtually everybody on any side believe in elements of the other side. This suggests that the ideologies aren't fully accurate, which should be obvious since no ideologies are.

Here's an example: the FDIC. We need this. The economy suffers tremendously when there is not a guarantee of deposits, and there is virtually no feasible way to get this exclusively through the private market. So we absolutely need the government to do it. This benefits every private interest. But this creates a moral hazard, because bank incentives change when they know they're not completely on the hook for deposits if they go under. This means that we need some other form of regulation to keep the moral hazard at bay. Which is what the government does, but that ends up creating other moral hazards. Then we get a perpetuating loop of regulations and hazards. Some are better than others, some are worse, some are unknown, some are solved. Some people look at this and say "see, regulations are the problem". But they're wrong because the lack of the initial FDIC regulation is super terrible. Others look at this and say "see, regulations solve the problem". But they're also wrong because some regulations create their own unique problems

No ideology can get us through this