Welcome to the post-work economy
BEN SCHILLER 03.15.16 6:00 AM
If the goal of the economy is to provide decent-paying work for everyone, that economy clearly isn't doing a good job at the moment. Real wages for most Americans haven't increased in 40 years. Real unemployment—which includes the "under-employed"—is above 10%. Many jobs are now part-time, flexi-time, or "gigs" with no benefits and few protections. And, we spend a lot of money to subsidize so-called "bullshit jobs": more than 50% of fast food workers receive some form of public assistance, for instance.
And, even for people who are employed, work often isn't that fun. For all the talk of the meaning and purpose of our jobs, most people see them merely as a means to an end. Only 29% of employees in North America say they're engaged (worldwide, the number is 13%). And the reality is that a lot of work will soon be done by computer. Processing-type technology has already eliminated many "routine manual" and "routine cognitive" activities, notably in factories and offices. And new artificially intelligent machines are likely to take away more, even within professional occupations. Forty-seven percent of jobs are at risk over the next 20 years, one study showed.
Of course, there are many conventional ways we could deal with this, including improving education and training (so more people can work up the wage-scale and beyond the ability of robots) and raising minimum wages. But, over the long term, it's questionable whether even these approaches will be sufficient. The fundamental problem could be that work is losing its value. The thing that provided—that allowed families to prosper and individuals to build a sense-of-self—is under attack.
In response, many are now calling for a "universal basic income" (UBI)—where the state gives everyone enough to live on. This would put a floor under the class of people we're calling the "precariat," people for whom work doesn't lead to increased financial security. It would free us from the bullshit, allowing everyone to benefit from automation, not just the lucky few. And it would leave us more time for creative, fulfilling things, enjoying the "abundance" that new technology affords (think how useful and cheap computers are today and imagine what they might let everyone do in the future). There are several UBI trials planned in Finland, Switzerland, and Canada (and, indeed, several reasons why the idea is attractive).
More at: http://www.fastcoexist.com/3056483/welcome-to-the-post-work-economy?partner=wired
= new reply since forum marked as read
a documentary on this subject would be quite an interesting watch. I will look into this.
I recall a lecture I attended during which my professor explained the concept of Keynesian Economics. The theory of productivity was that productivity would increase linearly and that we would all share in the successes of our economy. Robots would do the work and we would have a 10-20 hour work week with massive productivity, and great wealth to show for it...
The professor then showed us how the productivity had increased relative to Keynes estimation, and it was relatively similar considering the great advances he had hypothesized. Wealth creation had also kept up with the Keynesian expectation.
Increases in technology should usually increase the wage rate, in theory, commiserate to the advances in output caused by that productivity. Thus higher tax rates would be levied on the persons who hold these jobs, leading to higher velocity of money... ETC.
Unfortunately this is not our reality. He who has shall prosper, and he without shall have his prosperity determined by he who has. The capitalist in my above scenario would likely increase the wage rate marginally for the laborer assisted by the machine because "does not need to do as much as before". On the other side he will invest in the capital because "he has the means". Then the difference is allocated by (and often to) the capitalist.
One day we may be able to have our tent cities AND our jobs... 
