This only works if you ignore reality. Scarcity will always exist. Even if you ignore human nature and assume that somehow the whole world will collaborate on natural resource allocation, scarcity will still exist.<p>Let&#x27;s consider housing, for example. You&#x27;ll of course say that everything is free so everyone will have a place to live, no worries. But who gets to decide who lives where? What if everyone wants to live in that nice piece of land with a view of the beach? So there you have it, scarcity.<p>Another example would be electricity, clearly another scarce resource. Where does the energy to fulfill everyone&#x27;s desires for free stuff come from?<p>There is an even better example of a resource which will always be scarce, which is time. Given that people&#x27;s time on earth is limited, we will still need to have our list of desires to be fulfilled according to each person&#x27;s priorities. If I can travel the world for free, why would I waste my time working in the toilet paper factory?<p>&gt; Whilst you hope to never have to encounter this limit, you can use policies such as &#x27;one child per couple&#x27; when we need to reign in the size of the population.<p>Talk about nightmare world. I imagine you propose this will be decided by voting. Are you willing to hand off such a personal choice to a vote, or worse to the ruling bureaucrats? What will happen to couples who have more than their quota of children? Are they going to jail? Will they not get their rice quota for the extra child? What about equal opportunity rights? Maybe the parents from previous generations who had &quot;too many&quot; children should kill the excess so that the new generations have the rights to have children too...<p>&gt; For example, a carpenter may want to make a wooden chair by hand, but may want a smartphone to be manufactured by others.<p>So just because he wants a smartphone to be manufactured for him, he&#x27;ll go and ask for it and people will do it? Even if you assume that smartphones will be free (a pretty bold assumption considering that for that to happen, everything in the production chain has to be free too, from the software that runs on it to the work of people digging mines for lithium. How realistic is that?), who will manufacture these phones? Who will sacrifice their time to assemble a phone in exchange for nothing?<p>&gt; Production will be based on demand.<p>Well no kidding, but you surely don&#x27;t expect producers will produce just for the fun of it?<p>&gt; Food would be free. All material goods would be free.<p>This does not compute. You said it yourself that resource usage has to be &quot;optimized&quot;, because resources are scarce. So there&#x27;s a price to them, even if you can&#x27;t see it because there are no prices. You&#x27;ll have to believe what the enlightened resource planners tell you. You&#x27;ll have to have people controlling the quotas, and then who controls the quotas of the quota controllers?<p>I have watched the videos you posted. The first one has nothing to do with a money-less economy. In fact I&#x27;m sure that what he accomplished was only possible because money exists. Otherwise one wouldn&#x27;t know if the work was worth doing.<p>The second video, frankly, has no grips on reality.