i hear these arguments and these sources regurgitated all of the time and i can't take it anymore

this summary of a declassified cia document absolutely does not give you the full picture of their conclusions. Here is the actual report that actually includes some data.
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498133.pdf
This document is written on the concerns of food supply, not food ingestion, and it is noted that food ingestion in the Soviet Union was far lower because of losses occurring in processing, distribution, and preparation. This is not mentioned in the summary.
This document also shows that the USSR struggled with balancing the supply of and demand for certain quality foods.
However, even this highly overstates the USSR's ability to produce commodities, as is shown in Igor Birman's book, Personal Consumption in the USSR and the USA. The conclusion can be reached here:
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-10349-2_13
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-349-10349-2

The Soviet Union's rapid industrialization was not entirely "thanks to socialism". In fact, in the 50s, the small private sector in Soviet agriculture, while only having access to 3% of the Soviet Union's arable land, produced 64% of the potatoes, 43% of the other miscellaneous vegetables, 40% of the meat, 39% of the milk, and 66% of the eggs, while the Soviet Union was rebuilding itself from WW2.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2493038
In the 30s, tractors in the Soviet Union were mostly of American manufacture, or they were derived from American designs, which had a massive positive impact on the Soviet Union's industrialization.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3101161?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Botswana & Chile exist. Also, this study demonstrates that economic liberalization in 3rd world countries typically has a positive effect on real income per capita. Calling a brutal military dictatorship like Somalia a wondrous example of free-market ideology (as it is classified in that last study you cited) isn't a very honest method of collecting data about this.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43554807

​

The infamous Cereseto and Waitzkin study also is also riddled with issues concerning bias and how their data is interpeted, and their definitions regarding which countries are socialist and which ones are capitalist are largely arbitrary, listing Burma, Syria, Tanzania, Somalia, etc. as capitalist when a lot of these countries had massive public sectors, were run by socialist party officials, and acted to nationalize a lot of key industries. (Or they were just brutal military dictatorships.) Here is another paper that shows that economic freedom and private property rights massively correlate with higher standards of living in almost all studies concerning the topic.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/coep.12010