Evolution:
Having a social safety net is not necessarily full on socialism, and I think that's a distinction your post fails to make.

Nothing precludes you from increasing your social status in most European countries today. That may not have been true in 1979 (why are you citing someone from 30 years ago for a contemporary discussion? Reagan hadn't even taken office yet :p) and was assuredly not true in any Soviet bloc countries.

I would go one step farther and say that the availability of a social safety net allows one to climb the social ladder more effectively. It's the same reason the insurance industry works -- you distribute the risk over a large group, some of whom will not need to use the insurance, while others who will. The less things you have to worry about, the more you can focus on the things that are really important to you. If rising on the social ladder (ie getting a good education and a good job) is the most important thing to you, you can focus on that and know that if something catastrophic happens to you or someone you love, it's not going to be on you to shoulder that burden alone.

The main point that I hope American leaders (and those who vote for them) will someday realize is that it's not all or nothing and acting like it is is detrimental to the long term success of the nation.

Also, another question to conservatives:
Why does no one care about the fact that the federal deficit and debt have grown under every single Republican administration since the Nixon administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...y_U.S._presidential_terms

How can you claim that Republicans are the party of small government and fiscal responsibility, when the only time they actually seem to care about it is when the other guys are in power?
And why is this not an issue? :p