No, it sounds like "workers owning the means of production, which is communist enough for me!
> And even if it did - it drives 0 innovation, nothing you do as an entrepreneur is yours (except like you said, 1/num-employees).
Be more open minded. You're making some weird assumptions.
> But like I said that's not how communism works- you as a worker get moved around where you are needed.
Ah, I see what you're doing: you're "reasoning" by cherry-picking a particular historical example of a larger category (probably the centrally-planned Soviet economy, which is not even a good example of communism), then insisting that category can't be anything but.
> The reality of communistic societies however is that it gets mismanaged by people in power due to fraud, power and control.
Sounds like capitalism.
> In capitalist societies you can own property, so you don't own 0, you don't own 1/100000000.
I was being a bit hyperbolic in my comment. It's not actually 0, but you're trying to argue a smaller number is bigger than a larger number.
Instead you have the option to buy 30 acres of land and build a house on it and have your own farm and do whatever the fuck you want on it - and ignore the state when you can - like I did.
Only if you've got the money. Capitalism is great for the people who have the money.