> This creates an immense amount of leisure time. As we focus on creating social systems which provide basic income and living needs, we are currently on traje

> This creates an immense amount of leisure time. As we focus on creating social systems which provide basic income and living needs, we are currently on trajectory for a system where people can choose to do whatever they want, with complete leisure. Could yes, but will it, maybe in the long run. In my lifetime, basic income will be exactly that, basic. Enough for probably shelter and food. You know people living off food stamps, see how much luxury they have. That is still tied to the economy. Most of the income generated will go to the people who own the machines that produce that output. The sort of optimism you were talking about Adam Smith talked about, it never happened in Capitalism. Despite the fact that we solved a lot of automation problems of producing food, shelter, and material goods around the 1940s. The government only has so much money it can give out. Divide the entire world's GDP by the population and you get 11,038. So if we could do that we can all live on 11,000 a year. That would be in the case that you took away the money from private interest and implemented something like Communism globally. That's not going to happen. The elites will cause massive wars before their give up their strangle hold and control on the world. Private interests will hold on to the money and make people work for it, as they always have.