First, you wouldn't get all programmers. You'd still have customer service. You'd probably also have executives, teachers, scientists, mechanics to work on rob

First, you wouldn't get all programmers. You'd still have customer service. You'd probably also have executives, teachers, scientists, mechanics to work on robots, doctors, cooks, and then your smattering of people mixed in to help with robotic and computerized tasks. Second, many people are not skilled enough in math and logic to program well. If programming became as pervasive as math education, lots of people would forget it after high school or never really learn it. If it became as pervasive as writing (as some commenters mention), then it would exist in a similar state: a collection of highly talented authors and a mass of untalented writers (with some in between). So you'd have to have newer programming environments that let unskilled people get some useful tasks done reasonably well. We have a lot of work to do before programming environments get there, but some people can make interesting things with mangled Excel spreadsheets or spaghetti code in PHP or copy-paste-modify JavaScript hacks. Third, also as some people mention, labor is cheap in certain parts of the world, so robots aren't economical. Contrary to what some claim, I don't think that will go away. There will always be some portion of humanity that is not sufficiently educated to be programmers. This could be due to socio-economic circumstances, or it could simply be because they don't want to learn it. Some people go through high school refusing to learn, others drop out. How do you fix that? If they can't get customer service jobs, then they have to sell their manual labor cheap enough to compete with robots. You'd only replace all that if you eliminate poverty on a global level and have excellent education globally too. Then there won't be cheaper labor, so those jobs will move to robots, and then there won't be enough people wanting to hire humans for labor and so finally that market would cease to exist. I'm not counting on that happening, not even in a hundred years and possibly not ever. With a concerted effort we might have a chance at a utopian-like society world-wide in a couple hundred years, but that's plenty of time for wars, natural disasters, apathy, tyrants, terrorists, or any number of things to mess it up. Conclusion: Sure let's make programming environments more accessible to less-nerdy people, and let's improve education about programming, since these things will improve lives. But we won't end up with all programmers.