As technology advances, more "wealth" can be created with fewer inputs, of course. Greater wealth means a bigger "pie" to split. Inequality obviously comes int

As technology advances, more "wealth" can be created with fewer inputs, of course. Greater wealth means a bigger "pie" to split. Inequality obviously comes into question here, but objectively there is more total wealth that can be spread around, so it's a net good, if we can optimize the distribution. It also means that the contribution of an individual can create more value. In some ways this leads to inequality, where the most capable people are able to capitalize on technology and make a lot more money than was possible in the past... see: any of the FAANG founders. Taking the thought experiment to a logical extreme: in a hypothetical world where 100% of the supply chain is automated, people would no longer be required to work. So it must be true that there's some level of automation that will produce a net decrease in jobs. At that point some form of UBI likely makes sense. Though I'm doubtful we'll ever reach that kind of state. Realistically people will continue to divert their efforts into new things.