OurToothbrush

Thats it interesting scenario, but why are you assuming that there is a significant segment that won't want to learn, especially when they're no longer alienated from their labor? And why are you assuming that the total laborers will increase with new technology, when you can retrain existing workers?

I dont think your scenario is realistic, it kinda reads as really misanthropic

You literally only have one question, the rest of it is opining.

You're assuming a wage labor model and that people working twice as efficiently and at half intensity would result in decreased production.

1. wage labor models aren't universal

2. there is no reasoning stated for why production would go down

You're assuming people would have to be fired to maintain competitive growth. This is based on the logic of firms competing to capture market share. There isn't really a rational reason for this to need to happen under systems were the point is to accommodate human need, not to maximize profit.

Your only question is "what am I missing" and the answer is an economics education.

But to address your "concerns" you're operating on the mindset of maximizing profit to compete against other firms maximizing profit, which is only a problem under capitalism (until you reach the monopoly stage)

Unfortunately in the case of econ 101, you are taught that 2+2=5 most modern econ is neoclassical, which means operating on pre-marx economics and just ignoring marxist critiques of the political economy.

and money falls from the sky, and everyone being lazy leads to growth, I’ll ask them to justify.

Thats a mighty strawman you invented. Workers are going to do the bare minimum to not get fired when it literally doesn't matter how much they work, their income will be the same. When workers are invested in an organization, they do more work.

Maybe you’ll change your mind one day and understand why the world we live in is the way we live in.

This from the person who is spouting econ 101 nonsense.

See you're still trapped within the logic of capitalism which maximizes profits and expansion over other concerns.

So, assuming we want to keep everyone (including useless people who’d rather have beer instead of reading a book to learn the new stuff), the income of everyone will just go down over time. Eventually, with no one getting fire there won’t be enough money to go around to feed them. What am I missing here?

These are all massive assumptions

Better to have them making the decision than capitalists, who make more money for paying employees less

Also who says half of them have to be fired? Can't everyone just work less?

Read the economy and class structure of german fascism if you want a detailed explanation for "scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds"

THERE were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.

Do you think the shareholders are active in problem solving? Workers include basically everyone but the shareholders. The tech guys, the executives, the managers.

Literally sharing nazi propaganda from Hearst press lol

Anyway, capitalism is known for never having famines or economic crises, especially not cyclical ones

The Prolitariat cant flourish if the party in power are actively genociding trans folks and minorities.

Democrats are also actively genociding minorities, the concentration camps and wars are bipartisan.

I've said nothing in my previous comments about voting. For me I do not see it as significant enough of a political act to bother discussing.