Re-distribution of wealth = Socialism
This is the response that confuses me most. it is a 100%=100% answer. No gray, no consideration that "redistribution" has a million different possible meanings.
As an example. In a SOCIALIST model, you would take ALL
the earning of EVERY PERSON, no matter if they made $1,000 a year or $100,000,000 a year, put all the money in a single account and REDISTRIBUTE it EQUALLY among all people either through cash payroll or through services. It is a Redistribution of Wealth.
As a second example. If the tax code today took 24% from folks making under $100,000 and 27% from folks making over $100,000, if you changed the tax code to take 20% from folks who make under $125,000 and 30% for those who make over $125,000 it is also a Redistribution of Wealth.
Yet the two examples could not be further apart both philosophically, economically or punitively.
Now, extrapolate the possible variations that could exist and see the reason the phrase, by itself, without codified budgets is meaningless.