Sound beautiful doesn't it? A veritable heaven on earth. Sad fact is, it's been tried over and over again and it will not work.
Now let's look at the nasty little variable that make it impossible: Human Nature.
Socialism is but a step towards communism. In order for socialism to be a viable direction for human existence it needs to be accepted by the whole. While this sounds like a possibility, human nature makes it an impossibility.There will always be someone that wants what someone else has. And there will ALWAYS be those who covet power.
That's why I believe the Liberal Left have it all wrong. They have it in their head that a socialistic collective is a viable human direction. That all the problems of man can be fixed if we all contribute to a system that reallocates resources where they are best utilized. But who decides how much we contribute to that system? A human. Who decides how to reallocate those resources? A human. And who determines how those resources are best utilized? A human. A human that is susceptible to human nature.
The humans that are charged with leadership will affect their will on the system. They will make decisions not based on the collective's ideology, but upon their own. They will no doubt make decisions that promote the IDEA that the collective is truly the leader of the societal structure but it will be a ruse. This has been tried before and it does not work. We need only look at socialism in Germany (failed), communism in Russia (failed), China (currently adopting a capitalist agenda), North Korea (do I need to explain?) and Cuba (failing it's people) to see the product of a tyrannical government that tries to adhere to the 'peoples' agenda.
Arguments as to the viability of socialism and communism are bunk. History has shown us that human nature negates a collective. In a capitalist society the strong stay strong because of the benefits as such, the weak get stronger if presented with that same ability to benefit. If a society that promotes socialism takes from the strong to reallocate to the weak there will be no net benefit for the strong and no reason to promote strength in the weak because they benefit from weakness. Penalizing the strong by negating their accomplishments and reallocating their accolades to the weak will promote weakness. Why excel in life if your going to just have to share it with someone that doesn't contribute to your excellence?
You want to truly comply with a liberal society? A live and let live social structure? Take a good look at the constitution ya unshaven hippies.
That's my two cents, spend 'em or put 'em in the dish for the next person. (My form of sharing with the collective!)