Rich people like to use socialism as: coroud sourcing expenses, getting bailed out of a finacial hardship and so on.
And they hate it because they would have to pay into the common pot (wages, social security, paid holidays and sick days) that would cut into the profit.

Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.

They’ll take “free” money from grants, tax benefits, etc. wherever they can get it. But money going to others is money they’re not getting. If they can convince the poor that getting money and services is bad, that’s more money for them. It’s very simple.

They do?

Inferring from your phrasing, and some of the other comments posted, the question is more accurately asking “Why do rich people love being bailed out / supported by the government, but have convinced the working class that being bailed out / supported by the government is something to hate / avoid?”.

I think the answer is honestly really simple. People are in many ways concerned with their own selfish interests. Government systems are, in some ways at least, systems that aim to distribute finite good supplies to a populous with near infinite demands. People generally vote / back systems that provide the most benefit to themselves. The amount of effort that goes in to backing gov systems, is partly based on how much of a benefit will be provided directly to the individual.

As an example, developers in Vancouver benefit immensely by convincing the government to bail them out of really stupid / borderline fraudulent condo construction, to the tune of $3.2 billion. These are developers who own penthouses for lols, have fleets of sports cars, personal art galleries, giant mansions in expensive areas, etc – who were facing potentially huge losses for trying to sell small 1 person condos for $1m+ in semi-remote areas (for a single person, you’d need to be in the top 5% to afford such a starter home). Rich people like those developers stood to lose a lot of money, so they put a lot of effort into lobbying government for bailouts. They can get really large sums from govt, in part because the bailout money is paid to a very small group. The amounts are so large, that you can even justify hiring full time lobbyists at high salaries to go after that funding – or, heck, looking at Musks govt funding, you can even build the ‘largest’ companies around using that approach.

When it comes to poor people getting bail outs / support, the payouts are far lower per person. Things like class action lawsuits are a great comparable – you’ll see huge aggregate settlement amounts, lawyers will get paid for practically decades negotiating the settlement, but the ‘victims’ will get a final per-person payout of less than $10. It’s barely even worth the time it takes to collect. The only reason class actions move forward, is because of those lawyers collecting huge sums for so long throughout the process (the lawyers personal interest). With most large-volume bailout plans / support moves from govt, it’ll often amount to similarly dispersed benefits – you’ll save a couple bucks from a tax holiday, or you’ll get <$1000 from some support program. It’s not enough to motivate people en masse to support it.

You could also add in to that mix things like poverty pimps / social workers, and the conflict presented in terms of their self-interest. They’re sort of similar to lawyers in class actions, where they’re high-paid workers meant to advocate/support for lower income interests. However, the continuation/maintenance of their high-paid social work, is practically dependent on the continuation of lower income issues / problems – so they’re de-incentivized to try and actually solve those problems. Some even hope for the situation to get worse, as it’ll be easier for them to justify/demand larger salaries – these are the folks commonly termed as poverty pimps. Social workers are, in some ways, a set of workers explicitly paid/kept as middle class to deflect the rage of the lower-class - one person with a billion dollars, pays 100 people 100k each, to keep the 1000 people earning nothing at bay. Those 100 people aren’t working for the interests of the 1000, even if they think themselves socialists due to the ‘social’ worker terminology; just like the class action lawyers, collecting millions in professional fees, to get victims a $10 payout, aren’t working for the interests of those victims.

So to loop back to your initial question: you gotta start by interpreting most people’s actions as being motivated largely by self-interest, in my view. After you’ve done that, it all sorta connects.

Because they’re just as stupid as other people, but they’ve also got the survivorship bias compounding the effect of their stupidity.