I recently saw on Facebook a post that said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his cronies don't believe in socialism - and they’re older white patriarchal males who enjoy taxpayer-funded salaries, taxpayer-funded health care, and taxpayer-funded retirement benefits. What they really mean is: No socialism - unless it benefits us.

As it currently stands, taxpayers are involved in socialism by paying for natural disasters, (such as California wildfires, tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, etc.). That’s socialism at its finest.

Corporations want to socialize risk and privatize profits, thus benefiting them at the expense of the middle and lower classes. The only way the public would benefit is if the corporations socialized the profits as well as the risks.

I'd like to ask everyone who doesn't believe in socialism but who supports opening the PolyMet mine (the News Tribune and anyone who voted for U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber included) to sign a binding agreement to be financially responsible for paying the clean-up costs if the mine ends up polluting the Lake Superior watershed.

With copper-nickel mining, the result of acidic water in the watershed is that it's more than 99 percent incompatible with aquatic life, not economically feasible to clean, and not fit to drink. Once our water supply is polluted, we'd be pretty much stuck with the consequences.

To my knowledge, Stauber has mentioned nothing about this possible outcome. Given the number of disasters that already have occurred in North America and around the world, one would think he'd at least mention the possibility - and then mention how much he'd fork out to help clean it up if a disaster occurred. If Stauber believes in socialism only if it benefits him and corporations, I'd rather not pay for the consequences of his decisions.

Gary Burt