The original post poses a question that many peeps misunderstand. As usual, helps to start by validating any silent presumptions embedded in the question: What are the underlying facts that support categorizing Denmark or Finland as "socialist," i.e., government ownership of property and central government controlled economy? What are the underlying facts that support categorizing them as, say, "capitalist," i.e., private ownership of property and free market economy? Is the form of government in Denmark or Finland a dictatorship, representative democracy, or what? Same questions for Venezuela. Stay away from other people's opinions or summaries; they are often wrong. Instead, drill down to get the facts yourself, the sine qua non of a trader.
Yep, that's why I put "socialist" in quotes. There is the whole "not real socialism" meme. The ones on the right will say Denmark and Finland are not socialism. And the ones on the left will say Venezuela is not socialism AmIwrongbro?
Even some right leaning peeps misunderstand Northern Europe countries as "socialist." As do some on the left. The common denominator is not political lean, per se, but rather low critical thinking skills or not caring. No left leaning economist of any repute would categorize Denmark, Finland, or any nordic country as having a socialist economy by common definition, including Marx's own.
socialism noun so·cial·ism | \ ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm \ 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism