Unless you become an actual slave, working for a wage is not having everything you produce taken away from you, so let's just dispense with that right here and now. I'd also like to point out that investing in means to make individual workers more productive is, in fact, a risk on behalf of the property owner. Unless you feel that other people should just hand over their property to the community to let the community decide how to disburse it.
Secondly, in either of those scenarios, the worker is subordinated to an authority. In the former, he has the illusion of being part of the ruling class, even though a majority vote determines what he gets. In the latter, it is determined by a contractual agreement with the owner of the property and the means of production. So long as neither of them involve the use of violence to coerce him into laboring and producing, both are anarchy. One is not more anarchy than the other; your incredulity at me calling socialism a structure with a central authority in it doesn't change the fact that it has one in it.
Voluntary, consensual exchange > using violence to get what you want. I'm also waiting for you to answer the question about community ownership of your body, since that's a means of production.