๐ฏ๐ฏ๐ฏ
Related to this, the $28 lunch discourse reminds me how ironic it is that the Venn Diagram of people that are communists and the people who expect premium food they do not make, purchase, or fetch themselves to be nearly free is a circle.
This, in a nutshell, is why large scale egalitarianism does not work. Communal living typically flattens your living standard to one universal level, and you will eventually have to take a shift in the kitchen or weeding in the sun. This is how humanity lived for a long time as nomadic hunter gatherers, and there was no person that got waited on hand and foot unless they were very old, or very ill, and that was only in good times of surplus.
Now, however, in the modern world, when you scale up egalitarian societies you get the freeloader problem. There's inevitably someone that thinks washing dishes or doing laundry is beneath them, and is upset the chickpea rations are mushy, so they start taking more than their fair share of the mutton.
That is what is happening with the $28 lunch people. They think an egalitarian society would let you select nearly free, delivered and prepared, fancy food on demand. The true labor and overhead cost of such a service does not matter to them, and you requesting them to consider it, let along participate in doing the labor or paying the cost, means you're just an evil Western globalist late stage capitalist or something.
Scarcity is not capitalism. It is the basic law of being a living creature on planet Earth. Unless and until we come up with technological solutions to the labor and cost (ironically, most the commies are also Luddites, as revealed by the data center discourse, so fat chance of that), you must pay for your fancy boy meals to be prepared and delivered to you, or you must contribute your own labor to feeding yourself.
Otherwise, you're proposing establishing a society with an exploited underclass of service workers to do that for you, which, uh, is not communism in theory, but it's definitely communism in practice.