You admit that your form of Socialism hasn't been tried anywhere at any time. Yet you're touting it definitively as the best answer. And yet you don't think you're being arrogant.
If you use data which indicates individual elements of an economic theory are successful and other data which says they would be successful together, it's not a stretch to believe that such a system would in fact be successful even if it hasn't yet been done.
It's simply looking at the data and drawing a logical conclusion. If you think anyone who does that is arrogant, you've got issues I won't even begin to touch.
In the spirit of bistiza's "correct structure" of a Socialist economic implementation
I've given you several pieces of economic theory and information which you don't respond to at all.
Your entire strategy is to ignore the facts I present because you have no way to challenge them. If you could have done it, you would have, but you just keep ignoring the facts. The last time I provided information and an example, no one has yet responded to it, yet I see you have time for a personal attack.
It must be convenient for you to ignore the material and just launch childish personal attacks whenever you come across someone who presents an argument you can't handle. Then when they point out your obvious inability to deal with it, you'll attack again and say they must be arrogant.
Next, you'll say some people here agree with you, so that proves you're right. You'll accompany that with another personal attack or two and again ignore the facts and material presented, because when it's too difficult for you to argue your point, your fallback option is childish bullying attempts and personal attacks.
I'm done here. It's pointless trying to have any semblance of a real debate with someone who acts like they are five years old.