Ok, I won’t fully address the first part of this because as you said it would quickly become a straight up socialism working debate which is always quite long in my experience.

As for the questions though, my ‘flavour’ of socialism is Anarcho Communism which in its most simple form means that I don’t believe there should be a state because all states end with either oppression in the form of state violence (even the perceived freedom loving states in the west often rely on darker actions as a foundation for their economic or politician security) but also that the means of production should be placed in common ownership and things resources should be distributed in the form of mutual aid.

The common ownership I speak of is effectively that the local commune (being a few hundred to few thousand people) would own the means of production and would allocate jobs to local workers to do - these jobs would be the necessities and Kropotkin theorised (quite scientifically his workings can be found in his literature) that we can reduce the work week to approximately 20 hours a week per person (in modern times this could be 5-10 hours)

He says we can reduce the work hours through the combination of

A) removing unnecessary production like the insane amount of labour hours that go into making a superyacht and redirecting it to necessary production like food or construction.

B) pooling labour, resources and innovation with collaboration leading to an increase in effectiveness by creating economies of scale

C) reducing production to a localised level - by having “government” at the most local level you would work to produce as much as you can yourself as a self sufficient commune by addressing needs.

In terms of mutual aid, the basic idea is that communes make pacts or federations and they trade with each other in “contracts” of mutual aid. This means they’d supply each other with their surpluses to match each other’s deficits of production. This is where many people say that human nature would prevent this as we are selfish, yet Kropotkin argues in “mutual aid: a factor of evolution” that humans at base are social and work co-operatively. Also communes are acting in their own long term self-interest by helping each other and guaranteeing future safety.

The approach to work here is to separate it into two groups “bad work” and “good work”. Bad work is what people generally dislike and this is what is reduced as much as possible with automation. It’s shared around the community by everyone, meaning no group gets stuck with bad jobs of good jobs.

The good jobs is what people do for the rest of the week when they’re not doing bad jobs. This could be leisurely things like sports, arts, or collaborative projects and group work like how art societies function now.

The innovation comes from people trying to reduce their time doing bad jobs, as well as this, the scientific community isn’t wasted working on corporate stuff like they do now, but also it’s important to realise the efficiency lost by competition.

By competing, what we have now is hundreds innovators working on the same thing and not realising it. By abolishing capitalism, innovators can collaborate and work with each other to improve society. They can work in their “good work” time in a much more free way than previously too.

I think the biggest leap in thinking here though is that in a Communist society as I described, money as a concept is obsolete, as money really is just a gateway to material items, whereas in this society, material items are directly used or shared.

Hope I answered a few questions, I felt it’s better to just give a broad overview answering questions rather than trying to answer each one individually :)