Good thoughts. I'd love to see us reach that post-scarcity point. To be honest, once we do, I don't think it'll matter what market model we use, since a large part of economics is meant to handle scarcity. Just like a person on an island doesn't need economics due to a lack of other people, a person who has everything they need in basically infinite supply doesn't either.

I agree with you that a large part of the problem with what I've outlined, outside of theory, is the issue of corporate hegemony reinforced by the same market protections I argue against. My post doesn't deal with it at all (perhaps for a future writeup?) but even if we were to completely shift away from collectivism/protectionism, the corporations which have been benefited to date would still be able to maintain control of the market, regardless of future actions.

Regarding public spending being crucial to innovation, I disagree. Innovation of the scale we saw through the 20th century was more a factor of manhours being devoted to a project. While the abundance of manhours came from government spending, I think it's false to argue that it needs to.

Thanks for your comment!