When I was a kid growing up in the 60's we had 3 trashmen working a truck. 1 man to drive and 2 men at the rear loading the trash. The 3 man crew eventually evolved into a 2 man crew...1 to drive and 1 to load. Now our trash pickup is done by a 1 person crew. The driver gets out and loads the trash then gets back in and moves the truck up a few yards, then gets out to load more trash. Now they are working on a self-driving, robot run trash truck.
Technology should go hand in hand with creative destruction. Old ways of life are destroyed, but the increased productivity should allow us to reduce hours worked and enjoy ourselves more. Doesn't work like that of course. But that only reflects the current inefficient economic paradigm, loaded to ensure all productivity gains go to the few.
An alternative is a universal basic income that let's people work fewer hours. All paid for by the taxes of those who work longer or harder or innovate. Now instead of deciding your own income so you can buy what you want, the government decides what you need. Likely families need more than singles, and more time off too. And your income can be cancelled if you are accused of a crime and can't prove yourself innocent. Work and don't hand over the money for the government to distribute? That's engaging in capitalism, punishable by death. I too am bothered by the wealth concentration, but if we take $100 billion from the richest person and divide it among 200 million American adults, that is only $500 each. A one time small gain that wipes out that person's assets and businesses.
Basic error here. There isn't a one time gain. It multiples through the economy. Crikey, even the IMF admits that the level of inequality (typically the result of rent seeking behaviour) is harming economic growth.
