You know how you think that leftists are silver-tongued schemers who attract people with nice promises only to take advantage of them? Yeah, that's what the right does. They're inherently elitist and thus cannot have popular appeal by being sincere. Any rightwing collective action is inherently predatory.
But anyway, let's assume both sides work this same way. Let's see how the leftwing schemers in the USSR lived in comparison to the common man. Whereas the latter had guaranteed housing, it was often 1 bedroom, probably 2 for married couples, and his job, likely in industry and thus fairly strenuous, was also guaranteed, as was a dignified pay, vacation and other benefits. The party bigwigs, whose jobs obviously were quite mild, had lavish apartments with 3 or 4 bedrooms.
Now let's look at America. The average joe has rights to neither housing nor jobs, and at this critical moment, there are at least 29m unemployed people and possibly almost twice that number, and about 40m people at at risk of homelessness. Their rulers, meanwhile, can own entire islands. Compared to the many, many of their countrymen who own nothing, they are better off by an infinite factor. Literally infinite, as divinding an island, or any property for that matter, by zero approaches infinity. The Soviet bigwig's apartment being 3 or 4 times a sbig as the prole's doesn't sound like much of a gap now. Well okay, I'll be fair here and help out your side of the equation and point out we're dealing with area here, so the bigwig's apartment would actually be 9 to 16 times bigger than the proles. Well, still not much compared to literally infinity. Oh, might as well point out the Soviet citizen had full access to healthcare guaranteed, another right Americans still don't have.
Conclusion: even if existing socialism had been a scam, it would still be incomparably more humane than capitalism regardless of whether the latter is a scam or not.
(posted again to correct that it's 40m people, not households, at risk of homelessness)