with all my heart
Everyone would work their hardest and share in an ideal world.
You don't even need an idealistic world, socialism is a broad term and to a great extant most of the successful countries in the world practice it to some degree or another.
I mean, in an ideal world, the government would be good. But innovation comes from individuals. Taking power from the little guy is never right.
While the idea of a socialistic economy works on paper, the result of how human nature has shown by the communist states of Germany and China, that those who are in power will still receive the most benefit. Further, while there are some who will be very supportive and productive in a society such as this, it is very likely that others will take advantage of a society like this and choose not to contribute, but maintain they have a right to the goods and freedoms of the society.
Idealistic world? I would love to hear an idealistic way to achieve socialism without the use of coercion or force. When I'm free to spend ALL of my money and labor on MY goals, needs, and personal choices without the threat of punishments political, financial, or otherwise, then you might convince me. However socialism is by definition the antithesis of that so.......nope!
The problem with this question is what constitutes ideal or utopian. Utopia is the good place that doesn't exist because it necessarily depends on individual value preferences which are subjective. In Cortez's ideal world he would an infinite supply of gold because he placed significant value on it. In Montezuma's ideal world he would have infinite jade rather than gold because that was higher up on his value preferences. Of course this analogy is deduced from what we understand of Spanish and Aztec cultures at the time but it still proves the point that value is subjective and hence utopia cannot exist. In my ideal world, socialism is nonexistent and people trade value for value free of coercion.