[Beasty]

hahaha, no, not communism. SOCIALISM (which is what you're talking about) still retained a currency, this doesn't as it's a RBE (resource based economy). The resources themselves are the only commodity, there is no middleman commodity like banknotes.

And to Donut, none of this implies the destruction of economic freedom, only a reduction in it. And how is reducing economic freedom a bad thing? The amount of freedom you have now is in direct correlation to the instability and waste in the current economic model. Wouldn't it make sense to curb a little freedoms in order to ensure a more productive system? It's not as if we don't do that already- you don't have the freedom right now to murder people, but that's not a bad thing. I suppose I could better correlate to the above with a different analogy- for instance, you are not allowed to manufacture drugs and sell them. Neither things have a direct causal harm to any individual, but in the interest of public safety and the functioning of a better system, we don't allow it. Or replace drugs with say high grade military weapons, or the laundering of money, and it's all the same argument.

In any case, I have yet to imply any social or political manifestations, all I've supposed is the economic portion of a new order. So to say that you wouldn't have lateral social mobility or that you would be "an enslaved worker" is ludicrous, especially when you come to understand that there would legitimately be a small amount of real jobs. The majority of jobs would be automated, and with good reason- it's faster, cheaper, frees up human time and would have happened sooner if not for the necessity to repress automation in the private sector in order to make our current out dated economic model work.