Perhaps the problem is that folks are looking for "a solution" to socialism, in the form of political tactics and strategies whereby the gains of socialism are somehow done away with through legislation. The problem being that this doesn't deal with what's really going on.
To motivate what follows, suppose that, instead of socialism, we wanted to find "a solution" to atheism ... does such a question even make sense? Why doesn't it make sense?
A creeping rise in socialism or atheism is actually a symptom of something else; specifically, it denotes a shift from an old cultural paradigm to a new one. Socialism or atheism "creep" because people's beliefs are shifting in that direction.
In other words, it's not a political problem in the electoral sense; it's a political problem in the sense of the polis -- the problem lies in what's in people's minds before they head to the polls.
As things stand at present, to be "against" socialism is essentially to defend the status quo -- or, more properly, what we believe to have been the status quo at some golden period in the past. The problem is, of course, that one can defend the status quo without actually understanding it. And, moreover, "the status quo" has no fixed definition -- it varies from person to person -- and as such it's pretty much impossible to mount a comprehensive defense of it.
It really is not a matter of "finding a solution" to socialism; any more than it's a matter of "finding a solution" to atheism. Effective evangelism doesn't "solve atheism," after all -- effective evangelism brings people to Christ: we say what we're for, not what we're against. One could say that atheism is "solved" by effective evangelism, but in truth what has happened is that people are transformed by the Gospel; that atheism is "solved" at the same time is obviously true, but it's also irrelevant.
In the same sense, a "solution" to socialism is not to be found in opposing socialism, but rather in offering a different, better, and transforming world view. People need to see their roles in society in a different light -- and when enough folks do that, then "socialism" will creep back into whatever hole it came from.
If we want "a solution" to socialism, we need actually to offer something better to replace it. What is the proper role of an individual in society? What does a "good" business (say) look like? What are our duties and responsibilities, as well as our rights?
Now, the interesting thing is that the rise of socialism and atheism have occurred together, and I don't think that's a coincidence. I think that socialism and atheism found footholds in the holes in American culture -- problems with our religious views and economic/political systems where actual injustices were not being addressed by the established systems.
Look at the racial problems of the mid-20th century: those were based on true injustices. The rise of socialism here and elsewhere was in large part a response to true and grinding poverty. The "status quo" of the time was unable -- and often quite unwilling -- to actually deal those problems beyond allowing them to remain in place. And thus, by default, people decided that these real problems should be dealt with by approaches that seemed actually to offer solutions.
For the moment -- in religion, economics, politics, and society as a whole -- we conservatives have no message to offer as an alternative. If we want a "solution" to socialism, we need to define an alternative and let people know about it. And we need to be patient enough to let it work its way out over decades.
But it's been around for a long, long time -- as long as evil has whispered that you can get something for nothing.