If it should be obvious then the evidence should be equally obvious. Or perhaps the world is a bit more nuanced and it may very well be that we're stuck in som

If it should be obvious then the evidence should be equally obvious. Or perhaps the world is a bit more nuanced and it may very well be that we're stuck in some local maximums that our current methodologies don't allow us to escape but escaping them is relatively easy if we chose to implement a meagre amount of resources for that purpose which is something we don't do because we're stuck in that local maximum and so on and so forth. Another way of looking at what you're saying is that we're doing things optimally and that there's no room for improvement when that very obviously is not the case. There are many gross inefficiencies in our system as it currently is -- look at food production for example. How much of the food produced globally is outright wasted? 30%? 50%? If we made a conscious effort to tighten that up we could reallocate those resources to solving the problems of automation issues that you're describing. The true hole in one for automation is a durable machine that can make a copy of itself as well as useful economic goods. Bonus points if this machine can be in a humanoid form to integrate into our existing economic infrastructure. Once you have a self replicator you can have it make as many copies as needed to solve any problem you need with minimal human effort. But a self-replicating machine isn't on anyones radar. Have you ever seen a politician or policy person discuss this?