I don't necessarily see it as a fallacy. Not because people are compelled by risk of starving to death but because why would they create when an AI or a machine

I don't necessarily see it as a fallacy. Not because people are compelled by risk of starving to death but because why would they create when an AI or a machine can do it better? What would be the point? I tend to agree with Orwell: "No human being ever wants to do anything in a more cumbrous way than is necessary. Hence the absurdity of that picture of Utopians saving their souls with fretwork. In a world where every-thing could be done by machinery, everything would be done by machinery. Deliberately to revert to primitive methods to use archaic took, to put silly little difficulties in your own way, would be a piece of dilettantism, of pretty-pretty arty and craftiness. It would be like solemnly sitting down to eat your dinner with stone implements."[0] If a society is jobless thanks to automation, I see this as the inevitable fate. And as for a society that values my happiness; I don't see being happy as a worthwhile goal for an individual to aim for. To be happy and content for a long period of time is, in my eyes, akin to being dead in the water. [0]: In "The Road to Wigan Pier" by George Orwell (I think it's chapter 12?)