> I doubt it would be an easy sell to suggest sharing the fruits of everyone's labour regardless of the amount of work each person has put into producing those

> I doubt it would be an easy sell to suggest sharing the fruits of everyone's labour regardless of the amount of work each person has put into producing those fruits. I agree, but I expect that's due to scarcity (which forces zero-sum thinking) and we're eventually going to get to Buckminster Fuller's idea of a "post-scarcity economy" where the automation generates enough for everyone. I think the author's broader point is well-taken, though: The way we operate as a society today may be generating a bunch of pollution (environmental, psychological, existential, etc...) and we may realize we're going to have to do something to reform that when the negative consequences emerge. The example in the article is poignant, but part of a broad class.