After watching the videos I'm able to answer them myself with a few words:

I would have access to the resources that "self-evidently" I must use.
The government would give access to those resources.

The first video has some arguments that we could discuss:

-Competition breeds monopolies/cartels

That's an opinion. You can read, for example, The machinery of freedom to know another one.

-Lobbying

Is it a problem of money or of the state?

-All laws must be interpreted

And ones are easier to interpret than others. I think the more objectives the laws the better. That's why private property is a good idea.

---

I have also picked some cultured pearls that the guy has dropped through the second video. I hope you disagree with most of them.

"Distribution of energy would be self-evident"
Seriously?

"Arriving at decisions, not making them"

Again, science can't tell you what to do. Not even engineering, because goals are not provided.
You make decisions to attain certain aims.
Ethics is not a science. Hedonism can't be proven right or wrong.  

"...to achieve peak efficiency of our resources..."
There's no efficiency in resources, the efficiency is in the use of resources to fulfill certain task.

"What do people need?
[...]
water and food
[...]
Desalinization and Hydroponic agriculture"

Why not collecting rain water and permaculture?
Is that part of the movement?

"Food, air and water are only scarce if we decide they are."
What about other resources? What are made those desalinization plants made of? Haven't they an impact on nature?

Also, what happens with population? If the survey of optimal food production can't feed the expected population, how population is going to be controlled?
What women would have access to motherhood?

"...the efficiency of the planet..."
Again, efficiency at what.

"...artificial scarcity..."
But there's no natural scarcity?

"...freeing the human labor force..."
The cornucopia.

"the free market leads to planned obsolescence"
It's possible with monopolies and cartels.

"
Government :
   resource management
   production management"
and this is not communism?
   
"increase social evolution"
Where does directed scientifically evolution goes?
Also isn't uniformity bad for evolution?

"Corruption won't exist without money because there's no reward for it"
What about sociolismo?

"Their rewards are the fruits of the society as a whole...self interest becomes integrated with social interest...everything is for the greater good"
This certainly sounds like a religion. Not one that is for diversity.

"power is maintained by ignorance"
So we should build more public schools?
 
"constantly monitoring the earth resources"
Good that labor aren't resources anymore thanks to the cornucopia. Otherwise it would sound like big brother.

"The only real problems in life are the problems that are common to all humans"
What was that Fischer thinking about. We don't care about chess.

"we should leave the old cities"
Oh, yes. And the cars too. Let's just burn it all and make more ecological and reusable products.

"innovative buildings"
But wait, is what you build today going to be innovative in 10 years?
 
"can be mass produced with little environmental restriction"
And without any limit I guess.

"we still don't have ocean cities"
That's what's wrong with our society?

a fish farm: "non contaminating integral parts of the ocean"
Isolated in the holistic sense.

"families will be happy without the monetary system"

"property is not necessary without scarcity"
Totally agree. That's the whole point of property.

"everyone has access to everything"
Some future invention will allow people to even access the same resource at the same time for sure.

"you won't steal things because you can't sell them"
No thieves in Cuba nor the URSS.

"TZM: we are the activist communication arm of the venus project"
Oh, now I know what is what

"...hopefully the logical spread of greater forms of central planning..."
That sounds like communism to me because I've read too much 1984.