It's not about strictly "owning", it's about controlling. Control can be achieved in many different ways, including, but not limited to regulations. Socialism is an economic system, of which you can implements certain parts.
I didn't say "social policies". Socialist policies are a more specific subset of social policies, so all socialist policies are social policies, but not all social policies are socialist.
Regarding the European countries' degree of being socialist, it of course depends on the country. But on average, you might be right, and perhaps using "equally" was an exaggeration.

[–] stetech@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism:

Socialism is an economic and political philosophy […] characterised by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.

I’m not gonna lie, I don’t think a common-good healthcare regulation or whatever housing plans fall under the definition.

Edit: there’s some merit to this you could’ve brought up, e.g. Germany’s mandating by law of some (limited) worker control in firms ≥500 employees in size (wikipedia link). But even that’s breaking with the definition, since it’s not about ownership, but rather a say in leading the company.