There are considerable improvements in the two zoom lenses you have listed, as these are two of the best zoom lenses ever mass produced. The original versions were not slouches by any stretch, but the "II" versions are much better, especially at the wider apertures. The only time the "II" might not be worth the extra price is if you are mostly shooting at narrower apertures of f/5.6 or higher or if you are only posting lower resolution versions of your photos on the web.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS vs EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II
Click 'Measurements → Sharpness → Profiles' and then select an aperture and focal length for each to see the base data. Here's another side-by-side comparison of the same two lenses. Use the mouse to switch the view between each lens and select various focal length and apertures for each lens. This review of the "II" compares it to the original at every step along the way, not only in terms of sharpness but also in terms of vignetting, chromatic aberration, distortion, etc. The "II" is a clear improvement over the original in terms of sharpness, vignetting, CA, and contrast.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L vs EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II along with the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC. Click 'Measurements → Sharpness → Profiles' and then select an aperture and focal length for each to see the base data. The Canon "II" again outclasses the other lenses, especially at wide apertures and longer focal lengths. While one or the other of the other lenses comes close to the "II" at some points, neither stays with it all the way from 24mm to 70mm at the wider apertures. It should be noted that the Tamron also has Vibration Control (VC), Tamron's version of IS which neither of these Canon lenses have. The Tamron is also just a little better than the original Canon for about the same price that the first Canon version sold for, while the Canon "II" costs about $1K more. The two Canons side-by-side at The-Digital-Picture. The II is clearly sharper at f/2.8 and 24mm from center to edge. By 70mm the original narrows the gap in the center, but not on the edges. Here's the review of the "II" that compares it to the lens it superseded.

The differences between the prime lenses you have listed are a little more subtle, and whether they are worth the extra price (if you can find a pristine copy of the older lens selling for much less that the replacements) depends on your planned usage.

There is not much optical difference between the EF 85mm f/1.2 L and the EF 85mm f/1.2 L II. The most significant differences are that the II auto-focuses much faster than the original and transmits distance information to the camera for use with the E-TTL flash system. The original 85mm f/1.2 L did not. This can be particularly important for something like shooting a wedding reception in a dark meeting hall or restaurant. The "II" also demonstrates less flare. Review for the EF 85mm f/1.2 L II.

Here is the side-by-side comparison for the EF 85mm f/1.2 L vs. EF 85mm f/1.2 L II plus the EF 24mm f/1.4 L II. DxO Mark has not tested the EF 24mm f/1.4 L.

Compared to the EF 24mm f/1.4 L, the EF 24mm f/1.4 L II adds weather sealing and Subwavelength Structure Coating (SWC) on the back of the front element which reduces ghosting and flare. It also demonstrates substantially less chromatic aberration throughout the entire aperture range. The center is sharper in the "II" through f/2.8, but the mid-frame and edges hold this advantage up to f/8. Here's the side-by-side comparison. The "II" is about 3.5 ounces (100g) heavier and a little larger. Optically, the "II" is a substantial improvement over the very good original design.

One note about price. When the older versions of the Canon lenses were still being made they sold for much less than their replacements. But in many cases the few existing new copies of the older designs are now selling for almost the same price as the newer "II" versions. For example, I paid about $1,300 US for my EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L. The newer "II" sells for about $2,300 US, but the few new copies of the original design you can find now are offered at about $2,000 US!

With regard to the Honorable Mention lens on your wish list, I would steer clear of the EF 50mm f/1.0 L. The newest copies in existence were made in the year 2000. Due to the nature of film not laying perfectly flat, lenses didn't have to be as sharp in that era and the f/1.0 is not as sharp in the center as the current EF 50mm f/1.2 L. The manual focus is a focus-by-wire system than Canon no longer supplies parts for, much like the EF 200mm f/1.8 L. The minimum focus distance is 2 feet (0.6m) compared to the 1.5 feet (0.4m) of the current f/1.2 and f/1.4 variants. There's no real compelling reason to select it over the EF 50mm f/1.2 L, and plenty of reasons not to.