[quote name='Brak']If a scientist and a McDonald's worker make the same wage, do you think the scientist will have the drive to take his job seriously, discovering the cure for cancer, or what have you? Hell, I doubt the scientist would learn to become a scientist, if he can make the same living flipping burgers. I understand that a lot of scientists are scientists to help the good of man, but we live in a career driven world.
I understand what you're saying, "working for the sake of work", but it just wouldn't work if it were introduced to an already active society / economy. It'd be much like introducing anarchism to an already established society (and I'm not saying Anarchism and Communism are the same things, either) -- it just wouldn't work.
Those who work "harder" generally get paid "larger"... this is how mankind has functioned for ages. Eh, for the most part, anyway. There are always exceptions to the rule -- always. Generally speaking, of course.[/quote]
Speaking as one of the exceptions, no I don't think the scientist would work as hard, and I said as much due to humanity's predisposition for survival. Communism is a utopian dream. But that's all it is - a dream. Until the desire for acquiring resources & reproductive privileges, and by extension money disappears, a thing such as 'work for the sake of work' would never be possible. Even if someone were to create an unlimited resource that fulfills all of humanity's current needs - free, clean energy & food, the imagination of the human mind will create more needs & wants so thus the cycle continues. So destroying the scarcity of a resource does not diminish humanity's desire for 'more'. In fact, I dare say it would go against human nature.