i thought communism was just central state planning of activities. Your Marxism on the other hand is 'from each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs',
In any event, a decision has to be made as to how a society is going to operate; for example i come from a place where healthcare is free at the point of delivery i.e. your doctor visits or hospital treatment don't immediately cost you money. They are of course not free at all and they are paid from the general taxes on your income.
When you have to pay for things upfront, then feckless people will prioritise beer and cigarettes over health care and when they fall ill, they will still be treated although perhaps at a slower pace, hence the long waits at the ER for the uninsured.
If as a society you didn't provide at least some welfare benefits, then what do you think would happen to the unemployed, the mentally ill, or the disabled? We no longer live in a system where families are together and the children look after their parents in their dotage. So the state must. Or do we assert that their lives are of no value because they are no longer productive units of economic activity? What of the retired?
You get my drift.
Naturally, indolent able-bodied scroungers should at least do some work for their money, but it might be a smart idea to see why they are unemployed in the first place and remedy that, whether that's education, or the creation of business-friendly policies.
So ends the sermon.
T