At least the govt. doesn't yet dole out apartments to live in, salaries to be paid, shoes to wear, etc. for everyone.)
But, we do have rent-control, a minimum wage in every state and welfare, not to mention workmen's compensation, food stamps, homeless shelters and public schools. One could complain that all these "state" run institutions are failures --and people often do when they want to criticize government-run programs.
However, there are clear and fundamental differences between the old Soviet Socialist system that you came from. Perhaps the first and most important is the idea of the "state." Here, those on the farthest right are always in favor of "states" rights. But, they are really using the term as a contrast to the "gov't" --which, to them, means the federal government.
Anyway, as one poster already noted, "socialism" doesn't mean the same thing to everyone; nor are any two socialist countries the same. We are a democracy, but so is Iraq. We are capitalist, but so is India. If providing or guaranteeing things for people is socialist, then so be it. We also claim --most loudly-- that we are a religious people. Well, it is written, somewhere ...
For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."