What I'm proposing is nothing like socialism. In fact, it is the epitome of the free market taken to its fullest. If you had read my comments down further (probably on the next page by now), you would see that. I even told you this in a reply a month ago but you failed to reply to that one. Therefore, it "sounds" to me like you want to dismiss my comments but because I'm basically a good person, I'll try to explain it once again. ;)
You say it would be impossible to achieve a situation where things are free (or very easy to acquire as I qualified it) but earlier, I did explain exactly that. Simplified, I said that since the banks currently take about 60% of all profit from all industries, we could initially wipe that cost off the price by avoiding them. This would make 'our' company more profitable than the big corporations that produce the given product today. On top of that, we could offer the quality it takes for said product to last forever (in marketing terms). After those two are done, the price would be lower and the wages higher. This allows the beginning of a new set of changes. With a new mindset of workers, we can add automation in a cooperative, non-competitive manner. (i.e. keep the wages it displaces while increasing the quality and resource efficiency) This now removes the need for the employees but keeps wages higher. The ramifications are long winded but the result is earlier retirement and more community support, which again supports earlier retirement. Picturing this scenario after a generation, you'll find unemployment going negative. This is the scenario that SHOULD'VE occurred from the industrial, information and connectivity revolutions. Instead, we gave all its proceeds to the banks which kept us poor. In fact, we lost ground on the 'prosperity per work-hour' scale. All I'm proposing is to reverse that trend.
Here's the comment where I explain why I believe making everyone more equal, financially, will reduce much of our crime.
"I'll show how you (as a parent) can easily corrupt any number of the 5 five-year-old girls having a birthday party at your home. You can start with any premise you want on how many are good or bad. It won't matter. Just find something they like (say really good cookies) and place a certain number on the table for them. Depending on how many cookies you place, it is easy to predict their actions. I use this example because it closely relates to how banks control literally everyone.
Cookies available . . . . . . . Outcome
1 Either no cookies get eaten or one alpha becomes a tyrant.
2-3 arguments, cookie stealing, underhandedness, hurt feelings.
4 someone will either graciously cave (but only a few times) or someone will go postal. If this continues throughout the day, cookie power (by an alpha) will become self propagating.
5 democratic sharing, leaving some in the beginnings of a greedy stage.
6 democratic sharing, leaving either one cookie or one gloating.
7-9 similar to 2-3 with lessening effects.
10 similar to 5 but maybe some barter.
11-14 similar to 7-9 but less again.
15 similar to 10 but with much more barter and maybe some uneaten cookies left on the table. The power of the cookie 'control' is gone.
16+ Cookies do not alter the group behavior and posses no power.
How many cookies do you think our banks put out for 'the masses' (in proportion)? I'd say they keep us at 4. In that way, corporations get 2 and wield power while 2 people miss out. Some get enough, others get more and many get less. Fortunately for them, those getting less aren't always the same people in each 'snacktime' which promotes competition to be chosen. This also serves to support an underground system of favors, division and ethics corruption."
Hopefully, that will give you an idea of the "how" it works. A shorter example is how people treat the 'penny cup' at the convenience store. There's rarely any stealing of those pennies and when there is, the criminal is only punished with peer pressure. This is because those pennies are of low value compared to labor hours.
Now for the "why" it hasn't so far. I'm convinced that our society has associated wealth to our social ladder. In every case I see (been watching for it for years now), people collect money through various means as a way to collect social status. Sure, those at the top collect it for power, but what is power basically other than the top rungs of the social ladder? At every level (rung), people try to climb to the next level so their job of maintaining is easier (i.e. they have more distance between them and the bottom. This applies to corporations as well. Today's companies are even ranked on their annual revenues and nothing else. This leads to compromising ethics for the sake of a little more money. People take jobs they don't agree with (think ad writers and actors). They do work they disagree with their boss on (for fear of losing the job). They even do things at home they don't think are a good choice (think buying a sub-compact car that won't last 5 years). Even many divorces are replaced with crime because of the financial incentives involved (from both sides). At the corporate level, they back-stab and connive to get a promotion. All in all, my estimate is that more than 95% of all crime (not speeding tickets but real crime) is committed for some type of financial gain. Of the remaining 5%, we can take out the mental health related ones (not part of this discussion) and we're probably left with a fraction of a %. How's that for crime prevention?
In case you missed it, I also just explained how I can jump on the millionaires without calling them inherently bad. They are just controlling a larger portion of society in their ethical compromises. The reach of their decisions touches many more people than that of the poor. This doesn't mean they're bad but it also doesn't negate the fact that the inequality is doing harm. Basically, I'm saying that we eliminate the problem and people's nature will shine as being more good. What most people propose these days to satisfy inequality is to take away from those millionaires. We all know that is not liberty but the socialism you fight.
To your question about how this would stop the elites from grabbing power, I would suggest that without the minions they can now buy off, their efforts would quickly fail. I personally enjoy a vision where alternative media castigated them so badly that they had a hard time even purchasing food! lol
It is not money or people that are the problem. It is the control of actions by rigging the money game (along with other control mechanisms like religion, unethical advertisements, biased media, etc.) ... THAT is the problem.