Well, it's for that exact same reason the rich will oppose socialism. Personally, I'm more in favor of georgism, which is like socialism with regards to social control of the commons (most notably land and natural resources), but not regular capital. I think this is important because there is a meaningful distinction between land and capital and shouldn't just be lumped together under "the means of production". Capital is created, where land (and natural resources) are not, thus taking social control of land via taxes works fundamentally differently economically (and morally, imo) than taking social control of capital which has been created. For example, my uni degrees are a form of capital, and a system in which society takes control of the economic returns on my education is a system which disincentives people from pursuing higher education. But if society imposes a tax on me for the land I occupy or the carbon I emit, that's completely fair imo. Plus, the key policies georgism is based on (most notably land value taxes and externality taxes) are just really good policies as shown by economics. Even Friedman begrudgingly called land value taxes the least bad tax, as they're progressive, economically efficient, and incentivize productivity and discourage rent-seeking.