Respectfully, the very fact that the question posed has to delineate particular qualifications for the idea to be considered "an excellent form of government" should give rise to the suspicion that the answer to such a question is inevitably going to be a negative one. Unfortunately communism, like it's foundational father socialism, is grounded in covetousness and theft. Regardless of whether or not those in authority in this form of government were hypothetically not greedy or unable to er, the moral-ethical dilemma still remains. Theft. Nothing is free and the redistribution of wealth required by such a system to operate is just that, theft from the pocket of its citizens to support other citizens. The maxim "the laborer is worthy of his wages" finds itself bereft of any meaning if the laborer's wages are stripped from him and given to another. Not to mention that the incentive to work for one's wages in such a system dies when those who work far less are paid the same as those who put in far more effort. Once the disparity between the two is realized there is no reason for one or the other to put in equal effort. Quality of work declines and the production of goods and services with it. Economic downfall is the inevitable result, which gives way to a host of socio-political problems. There is good reason why history has been communism's greatest apologist.