Can Socialism be Justified through Utilitarian Ethics?

This is a serious question.

I wonder how beneficial or detrimental things would be if society were to embrace a fully socialist philosophy in the organizing of the means of production for an extended period of time (at least a few generations). From my anecdotal observations of diet socialism tested in the real world, certain things would improve. There would be less economic inequality, and production might focus more on a good product rather than how to scam the consumer and the shareholder. There would also be more respect for environmental sustainability. These are some positives among many.

Among the negatives, I wonder if science, technology and innovation would proceed as quickly, as these things matter as well. Would technology develop as well in such a world? There were some people in a recent thread who said the world would be better if physics had not progressed beyond 1930 levels, because weapon capabilities expanded after that point. I don't rally have a socialist mentality, so often I try to estimate what socialism would lead to by asking people who are very progressive what they think of things. In a recent discussion with someone, she said she doesn't support increasing funding for the space program, something alone the lines of because a lot of children are going hungry [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img] . I suppose we could have a world where people went into poetry and the fine arts, had 1 or 2 kids, there was peace everywhere... and then history stops. It doesn't sound appealing to me. For all the inequality of this world, it is nice that we have long lifespans, and that our body of knowledge is so rich and expanding so fast.

Would the good outweigh the bad?