In my world, the socialist society would have a very strong industry. There would be a lot of factories, manufacturing centers, machine centers, and mining sites. Education would be very important to help advance technology. Science would be strongly supported. Research centers would be very common. And although the minimum work requirement is 30 hours a week, most occupations would work 50-60 hours a week.
The "state" is a production and wealth coordinator that coordinates what is to be done. Since humans are different, anarchy cannot work unless if every human was exactly the same because there would be dispute since different people want different things, so there must be a neutral state that can protect the desires of each person. The state is protected by the law enforcement, which is composed of the military, and the police. And a Socialist constitution would determine all of the rules, so that no one is above the law. Corruption and bribery would not exist.
In case you may be wondering why no one has bothered to reply to your inanity for *months* now, it's because it all boils down to *idealism*. You're regurgitating a political 'wish list', with your mere opinions on display, as though outlining your own utopia would be enough to *enable* the possibility of such a society.
But there's no such thing as 'a neutral state', because a state -- by definition -- has a *monopoly* on power, including violence, which is the *opposite* of 'neutrality'. This concentration of power *inevitably* produces corruption and bribery, because such social dynamics, favoritism and privilege, respectively, are effectively made into political *commodities* by the elitism of the state, which are then *purchased* by those with the means to do so.
Also, the populace would have to implicitly *tolerate* this kind of technocratic rule, otherwise it couldn't exist *at all*, even with its effective monopoly on power, no matter how many guns and weaponry it may have.
As I and others have told you repeatedly, you are *not* a socialist and what you describe does *not* resemble socialism in the least.