You will own nothing, and be miserable.
Except, of course, you will be on "drugs" that make you not care that you are having your life squeezed out of you (ala Brave New World)
The salesmanship of Marxism is truly top-notch.
They tell you all of the good stuff, that could possibly be and they tell you none of the bad stuff, and they tell you, if you even ask about all the failures before, "That was not real communism". Of course, the Marxists have changed the schools so you do not even have the tools necessary to question the Marxist propaganda.
If Capitalists had the same moxy for propaganda, they would be saying that "people are getting more and more efficient, thanks to capitalism, soon no one will have to work and everyone will live a fun and fulfilling life."
You aren't home, so why not share your space?
The Mother WEFers advert starts off with "sharing". Or, what the navy calls "hot bunking".
"You aren't home, you are at work, so why leave that space empty?"
" It's a waste of space and housing", the WEF says.
This is one of the most evil statements i have ever heard.
But, they coach it in a way that sounds like "sharing". And that you are being a good person for sharing.
Your space is not some hotel space, where they may have multiple conventions and meetings at the same time. It is your space. Things in it are where you put them. It smells of you. It feels of you.
Further, space is not limited. It might seem like it if you live in a large city, but go a hundred miles away, and there are empty spaces, some so empty that no one has set foot in them in years. Our cities were created in a time when everyone needed to be close to the manufacturing. Manufacturing needed lots of people in big buildings. Today, so much of the work can be done remotely. And the actual manufacturing does not need to be so close together. We now have international shipping and international communication.
So, why should you share your personal space? We have gotten so good at building houses that a personal space should cost you less than 3 months of your life, total.
If you are a sensitive person, then you will never feel comfortable in a space that you "share" (with whomever needed space) it will destroy your life, your sense of peace. And everyone is sensitive, most just shut it off because that is what the WEFer world teaches them.
Further, even the cleanest person will leave things messed up just a little. And most people aren't that picky. And many people are hell on shared places. (Just ask the people who clean up after conventions)
So, instead of being a "nice person and sharing", they are asking you to destroy your life, your health and well being. And do this because they made it impossible to build a house for everyone. The WEF is why we don't have enough housing. They made the problem that they are going to fix by "sharing".
Why have your own kitchenware? You barely use it.
The mother WEFers advert goes on to talk about sharing kitchenware.
That it will be delivered to you when you need it. So, we really don't need to have one of everything.
This is such a huge fallacy. But, many people can't see through this because FedEx / UPS / Amazon does a good job hiding all the intricacies, the people, the storage, and the delivery. They hide the shipping and handling costs under "free shipping". They don't tell you that more than half of price you pay is shipping. They hide that.
The thing that gets me most is that they use kitchen utensils as an example. This really frosts my cookies!
You can buy a spatula at the dollar store for $1.25. This spatula costs about 5¢ to manufacture. The rest of it is shipping and handling and profit. Even the really expensive $10-$20 spatula at chef store costs about 10-20¢ to manufacture.
So, instead of shipping them all over the city, even if it was automated, it is cheaper and easier to just buy one spatula for every kitchen. If you are in a homestead community, buy them in bulk. Buy a whole box. It is far cheaper.
Even if you shared utensils with a neighbor, where you would just walk a short distance to each other's kitchens, it still takes you way more energy than the spatula is worth. And this is the smallest, easiest, sharing transaction i can think of. (unless you share the kitchen, and still you will want at least one spatula at each cooking station)
Again, the advert tries to make you feel good, because you are "sharing" but it does not account for time wasted waiting, and energy wasted shipping cheap products around.
Sharing vs Not Sharing
Sharing is nice and all. It gets a better rap then selfishness or greed. But it is not really a virtue.
It is more of a cope of not having enough / scarcity.
Sharing is ok if you get the item shared back in the same condition you lent it in. Else, you are just throwing away your item. Is throwing away your item a virtue?
You know, sharing your toy car with your kid brother who still puts everything in his mouth, means you get a stick mess back. A mess that may never come clean, and may never be what it was. But mother shouted at you to be nice and share.
I have seen people switch to a strict ownership model. (they labelled every piece of train track in one example) Where, you didn't just assume that everything was of a collective nature, but had to negotiate borrowing. This one experiment came out that things worked out much better. Negotiation skills were improved, and both kids were far more respectful of the train track.
And this little experiment seems to scale up.
We are much more respectful of things when there is proper ownership.
So, instead of sharing, maybe we need to go the complete other way, to extreme ownership.
The Marxist always find something that not everyone has (and then make it scarce) and they tell the people without, that those people who have should share. And, of course that sounds good to the poor. Those rich people over there should share. It sounds so appropriate, because our mothers shouted at us to "be nice and share).
However, what the Marxists never share is that all the things that the poor have are because of the excess of the top producers. They have food, not because of their own efforts, they have food because a farmer, who is 10x more productive than them grew enough for everyone. (i am not kidding. Even giving some of these people a garden plot, and all they need, you will come back later and almost always find a plot filled with weeds and dead vegetables.)
We do not live in a world where we are all equal. Some people have green-thumbs, some have entire green-hands. Some have brown thumbs and some just cannot be relied on to keep anything alive.
But, the Marxist will tell us that those evil farmers are not sharing their food. And we should get rid of those evil farmers and take their farms. And then, they did that. And then, millions of people starved to death.
Be aware of the story Marxists tell. When they say, "we should seize the means of production" they mean, we should destroy the means of production. Like a child being jealous that his brother has a toy car, so he complains until mother takes it away from its owner, and gives it to him. With which, he promptly destroys it.
There is no real sharing. (it is a good sounding myth)
There is just the process of making one for everybody.
And the thing to really watch out for is that the Marxists do their best to stop the process of making one for everybody. With their laws to "regulate" manufacturing, or stop too many houses from being built. Adding production taxes / inventory taxes.
These vile creatures, who preach "sharing" are actually the very people who stand in the way of making one for everybody. For, they cannot have a world where everyone is happy and has their needs met. Then the mother WEFers would lose all of their power.