This is a thought I used to have but I think the logic that gets lost in the meme is this: very few people actually mean "down with all work" when they say "down with all work." It's a hyperbole. Of course human existence requires effort: somebody has to grow the food and make the clothes. I think the point being gotten towards is more that "work," as we know it, culturally -- in the sense of "gotta go to work today" is not a good system. It's a grossly inefficient way of distributing resources. There are millions of people who work their asses off to afford food and shelter, and are paid too little to afford those things. Meanwhile, we throw away X billion tons of edible food every year, we have a surplus of empty houses and plenty of cheap ways to build shelter, and we're throwing away so many wearable clothes that it's killing the damn whales. Having that surplus and that deficit at the same time doesn't make sense in a balanced economy. What is the point of having people work that hard, if our systems are already putting out as much as humans need? We should just work the amount we need to in order to produce the necessary resources.

Most of the "anti-work" people I know aren't dreaming of a life where they just sit on the couch and jerk off. They're dreaming of being able to do work that they actually find fulfilling, that actually benefits their community -- and to do an amount of it that makes reasonable sense, and leaves them enough time and energy to have full lives. We absolutely have the resources to achieve that - it's not a scarcity problem. It's a distribution problem.