No reasonable person FACTUALLY disputes what you're saying about work; it's so something-like-tautological and obvious that you should all think about why people seem to parrot it over and over.
It's not because human beings are likely to keel over and stop working in the face of nature. It's because it's a longstanding political wedge used by the powerful to get working classes to go against each other.
Even if you are willing to go back in time to a simple farm in a small town, you are still taking for granted that you will have people helping you survive. And you still aren't entitled to their labour. They will help you plant your field if you help them plant theirs. The scale of our society has changed, but the transactions haven't.
In any case, you seem dead set on misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I'm saying. If you're not going to address my actual arguments, then kindly get lost. You're wasting my time
The idea that you can just not work is not realistic.
The "pointy stick" you are talking about is nature, as in we will die without working to survive. You aren't entitled to the labour of others to ensure your survival.
You can either work at survival, eg: growing food to eat, building shelter, making clothes, etc, or you can have others do that while you provide something else.