"I am an engineer and have never taken an economics course. However, I have read extensively since 2008, including Keynes, Keen, Picketty, Hudson, and Roberts."
Choosing books on economics based on your chosen political ideology is not going to offer you much in the way of expanded knowledge. And much, if not all of what you're addressing are policy issues, not economics. You can use economics as a tool to determine or shape public policy, but economics is not really a thing. It's not an instrument. You don't "use" economics to do anything.
And I don't think you really understand Marxism. You may feel like you have an understanding of the end-state Marx was predicting...which could still come true I suppose, but Marx predicted that socialism would succeed because everyone would want to work collectively in a manner that would leave everyone free of what. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. And that's works in small, connected populations, like a family. Because those with the abilities care more about those around them in that population that they do themselves. Marxism failed to deliver because those with the abilities had no interest in supporting those in need with whom they had no care or connection. And that's still the case today.
Last thing, IRT JMK. He's not a fringe economist by any stretch, and I would go so far as to say that the Chicago school and Reagan were influenced as much by Keynes as they were by Hayek. From my vantage point, I think that Keynes had a better understanding of Macroeconomics than any of his contemporaries, but that doesn't mean his contemporaries were all wrong either. Keynes has been glorified on the left as a champion of progressive economic though, while skewered on the right for the same thing. Both sides are wrong.