In a properly functioning economy as productivity increases, people become more prosperous. They should be working LESS and having more.
They should be, but they are not.
Anyway, the government is a huge part of the problem - to say the least.
We had government for centuries, beat off the nazi with government, landed on the moon with government, had some of are best growth years with government. Why is government suddenly the problem now? Is it a function of lack of adaptability, well that a human problem, society will need to adapt and government is a component of society, we may very well need a totally new kind of government for a future in which most if not all people are obsolete as producers of anything of value. But that is a bridge to be crossed later, now I'm asking the question is automation is the
causative factor for all of this, we have had government corrupt, government girth and government interference for centuries now and been relatively stable, but make more and more people obsolete and the side-effects to government, to society could be devastating. The point here is that government ills is just part of the wood, the fire is progresses its self.
Imagine if you had a 3D printer that sat in your house, solar power energy, and could make most anything you wanted in terms of electronics, shoes, clothes - etc.
We are long ways from a 3D printer that can do all of that, I would say we would need T1000 level nanites to make all that.
And when done, you just put it back into the machine to be recycled. Surely you can't say you'd be LESS prosperous. I think of robotics (or Chinese factories) like this 3D printer. You can not become less prosperous with such a machine.
What about those that don't own such a machine? All factories would be obsolete with such star trak replicators as you describe available, anyone who does not own or have access to a replicator would have no means of getting ANYTHING other then begging people that own replicates, or doing services for them, and what services could be done for people that own replicators if they can replicate a 'servant' that does ANYTHING for them?
Here's what BofA Michael Hartnett says, "we are long robots, and short human beings."
I've already cited work like this, already noted US manufacturing is at a all time hire, but an all time low in employment (and lowering!). Ideally all the productive capacity for such few workers would have meant we all live prosperous lives and barely work at all and dedicate ourselves to the arts or something, Keynes in is 1930 essay "Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren" spelled it all out but got it horrible wrong. See the money from all this productive capacity is not being distributed to everyone, hence why we don't live the utopian life he imagined but are working hard and hard for less, every year. All the money only goes to the owners of that productive capacity, why the wealth gap is so large today. How do we equalize that? Well for starters we need to raise the minimum wage, forcibly drop working weeks from 40 to 30 and even lower hours a week, we need to get everyone invested in stock, owning shares of industry, we need to tax the rich more, tax companies based on their automation level, etc, etc, all this requires government, lot of it, of course I mean a government working for the people, of the people, by the people,
and not for rich lobbist as it presently is, that will only lead to further social divide between the rich and poor until technology allows the rich to purchase kill bots and kill off the "free-loaders" once and for all.
With robots doing a lot of the low skilled work, this leaves people a lot more free time. Therefor they can do other things (like vacationing) or offer other services like personalized education per child, etc... This is only possible when we have sound money and a deregulated market that allows free people to freely value and trade with one another.
Why would I want a human teacher when I could get an android one that will teach my child better (and not molest my child behind my back)? Your simply failing to imagine the possibilities of a UNIVERSAL DOER, there would be nothing, NOTHING the doer can't do that a human can't, and likely nothing a human could do better. We would in fact need to REGULATE what humans can do and doers cannot do. For example we would need to say "Doers are forbidden from making art" because they would be able to make art, pump it out day and night without sleep or art school or "inspiration" other then random number generators and analog noise. Take for example dubstep, vocaloids, and CGI movies of today. Disney more recent movie "Frozen" utilized fabric collision events for the clothing of its character (hair collision was present in their last movie, 'Tangled') before animators had to by hand and frame by frame move the fabric about, but now computers do the job, meaning less animators are needed. Someday perhaps a Strong AI and a lot of graphic processors could write up a plot, create characters, paint backdrops, animate them completely, distribute the movie, etc, all on its own, thousands of artist useless or having to compete against machines! So we would need to regulate and say that art is only for people, say that a minimum of X people are needed per movie or art work, etc, etc, even go back to hand drawn and stop-motion animation (which honestly I love). And that is just art, everything and anything humans do would need to be considered for regulation, toilet cleaning, give it to the machines, basket weaving, aaah humans, plastic chair printing, duh machines, Operas, humans, etc, etc. Either that or we give up rights to being productive in any way.
What do you mean people will have no value other than as consumers and how is that different from now? Why is selling labor something more valuable than working as a trainer or educator or entertainer?
An andriod trainer is going to be there for me 24/7, never judging, always coaching, why would I want a human one?
An andriod educator knows more, teaches better, never get frustrated and is there 24/7, why would I want a human one?
A gynoid 'entertainer' I can fuck every which way, her butt never sags, her tits you can bounce a dick off, she never get diseases, she can play any instruement, dance to any song, sing it, oh and she even makes sandwich on the demand "bitch get me a sandwich!" why would I want a human 'entertainer'?
No one makes their own shoes any longer in the USA, this doesn't devalue people - the shoe makers just go on and do something other than making shoes.
Back to my very first sentence of my first post on this thread. The anti-luddite argument, I given multiple reasons why this can't hold true, but I don't think I cover the fact that here is not an infinite number of things we can do and frankly of that only a tiny percentage of things people want to do. Why do you think we are at 80% service sector economy today? do you think all those people like having jobs like cashier and truck driver? Why do we not have more artist and hobbyist living the good life, because demand for those things are limited, a horrible effect was noted by economist Lawrence H. Summers in his lecture "Economic Possibilities for Our Children" (A successor to Keynes 1930 essay) that unlike things like chairs and shoes and pizza the cost for services like musician have not dropped in adjusted dollars, meaning they cost more today then they did 100 years ago! Most people today are satisfied with recordings, with electronic art in which one DJ can do the work of a whole orchestra, actual live musicians cost a lot now, either that or they live on the streets, making nothing! In the past if you could play a instrument you had a good chance of decent employment in say 19 century Britain, today only a tiny fraction of very pretty artist actually 'make it' most of the rest are on the street corner.
IF we got to a day where it was 100% vacation time, then that's great. And, I'm sure, one day we will.
If we get to that day we would need to pay people just for living, do you relies how dramatic a difference in social values that would require?
. The main thing is that the money these people made and saved was sound savings so they can invest in opening their own businesses. Also, the people must be free to trade with one another - EVEN cheese (in today's markets the first 'regulation' the cheese factory owner would make sure got through CONgress would be to prevent others from making cheese).**