For you (or anyone) to expend wealth, someone must have previously created it, else there is no wealth.
If the creation of wealth were a mechanistic process, some huge number of people would have employed such a process long since. They have not, therefore, such a process does not exist.
As regards 'robots', or some other flavour of automaton, providing the effort to let you lie in the hammock forever, there are numerous formal demonstrations of the impossibility of this notion. Purely regarding automatons, Turing theory demonstrates this quite elegantly. From a more traditional humanistic logical standpoint, Kleene, and before him Godel (not to mention Fitch and Thomason, and for that matter Ruth Barkan-Marcus) have all generated insoluble paradoxes, or, if you prefer reductio ad absurdem arguments against the postulate of the availability of 'infinite leisure'.
For my part, I would simply observe that SOMEONE must plant and harvest the corn, and feed the cattle (scr*w you, you silly vegetarians), and deliver same to market, and butcher them, and pack the product, and deliver product to stores.
Planning to raise all your own food, are you? Takes a bit of work...cuts into to your notion of 'infinite leisure'.
No, robotic workers will raise my food.