Boy, are you missing my point. Your point makes some limited sense in today’s world. But that’s not what I’m talking about.
I’m talking about a world in which almost everyone is “non-productive” in an economic sense, because there is no demand for any services they are capable of providing.
This does not mean they are lazy, or have no work ethic, or do not want to produce. The economy has just changed to the point where it is not possible for them to be productive.
I understand this is a concept difficult for most to imagine. This is because human society has existed since its inception in scarcity. The whole purpose of a market is to decide who gets scarce resources. But what if, as an intellectual exercise, we posit a world where “stuff” is not scarce? Can a market exist in the absence of scarcity?
In an immensely wealthy world, do you seriously contend such people should be allowed to starve simply because they aren’t needed any more by the productive economy? Is this in any way their fault?
Are you aware that if the trends I’m discussing continue long enough, you and I, or our children or grandchildren, will most likely be among those “non-productive” classes you would abandon? Not our, or their, fault. Just a result of the natural workings of the market.
I dispute that there CAN be such a world. There will ALWAYS be scarcity of something. What will change is what that "something" is.
By the standards of 2000 years ago, we have the ability to give everybody all the wheat they want. But people today now want iPads, 4K HDTV, Lexus cars, etc, etc. As our ability to produce has increased, our ability to WANT has also kept pace.
There are very finite limits on the amount of prime beachfront property that is not subject to technological advances. Likewise other kinds of prime land. There are limits to how much available energy there is (without frying the Earth in waste heat), etc.
In an immensely wealthy world, do you seriously contend such people should be allowed to starve simply because they aren’t needed any more by the productive economy? Is this in any way their fault?
Please note that I never said anything about letting them starve, just not giving them an incentive to have 10 kids.