Well, in a perfect world, it would work, but giving a government that much control of the economy in the real world is downright dangerous. With economic (and hence political) power so concentrated, the time of the transfer would be a perfect opportunity for a dictator to seize power. Anyone in the government could, for example, pay off the military with the money of the wealthy and set up a dictatorship. I can imagine a seemingly selfless person taking a volunteer position with that aim in mind (I think that is probable, in fact). In terms of radical wealth redistribution, I once supported it. But then someone pointed out that the wealthy would probably leave the country if they thought a socialist (or communist) victory was likely in an election and so take the wind out of the economy's sails. Then, even if wealth redistribution was achieved, there would be far less wealth to distribute. Finally, in the utopian stage, do you really think that collective incentive would be as strong a motivation for prosperity as individual incentive? That is where my theory about the callous and the fear that they spread (see my last post in this thread) comes in. I'm sure you've read all of this before, by the way.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)