My point is that it is better to avoid having to get the government to tax the corporations and distribute the profits from robots. The government is run by the rich, and would do a very bad job. If the displaced workers own the robots, the money goes to them directly, and they get to manage their own affairs. Rich people are basically parasites who feel entitled to cheat us into providing them with outrageous luxuries, and have no qualms about starting a war just to sell guns. They have been regularly assassinating progressive leaders to stay in power, and conspiring to avoid all consequences. Crowd funding has replaced the only social utility of millionaires.
We both know of people who have ten times more than we do, and others who have ten times less, but we can't really imagine their daily concerns. Imagine how unconcerned a billionaire must feel about us, with other billionaires all around. Psychopaths are so slippery that they get a new scam going before we have finished signing a law against their last one. The only law broad enough to stymie them, AFAIK, is a blanket prohibition against private wealth. The richest person should only have ten times more than the poorest person (ascetics excepted) on a bell curve, so almost everyone has similar wealth, and we don't have to worry about locks, etc. The range of talent is greater, but talent works for self-expression and is inhibited by great financial risk.
An interesting model, that is, send your robot to work for you. Are you suggesting that your robot would be paid your "living wage"? You would be responsible for the purchase price, insurance, all the maintenance, software updates, and daily charging costs.
In this "capitalist" model:
1. Low income folks, folks on some form of financial assistance, might not have the resources to purchase a robot, nor the associated costs. Furthermore, in a world of robot workers, few employers are going to hire humans knowing the productivity differences between the two. The poor will remain poor because they might not be able to participate in the economy.
2. Middle class folks would be able to afford 2-4 robots, and the be able to pull in the income from, potentially improving gross incomes.
3. Wealthy will be able to afford entire fleets of robots, further pushing their income upwards.
4. Prices for goods and services might not drop, nor will accessibility. No significant changes from the current socio-economic structure. People will still be dissatisfied with wealth disparity.
A "socialist" model, which I am also highly biased against, but may be a necessity in this new world, might work, but this requires a long list of "IFs", as described in a previous post.
I don't see any way of significantly affecting the percentages of nor the rise of the "elites", "uber wealthy", "sociopathic or psychopathic" leaders. As you've suggested, humans have the common personality traits of greed, accumulation of resources, envy, jealousy, and competitiveness. Some more than others, and extremes in these traits lead to either extreme wealth and/or criminal behavior. Luckily, these individuals make up the tiniest percentage of the population. On the other hand, humans also tend to be social creatures, seeking comfort and safety in numbers, are often motivated by fear, and will tend to follow the herd,...all of these traits allow them to become easily influenced and controlled. The vast majority of the "working class" have been brainwashed over the centuries in the sense that their entire social structure and narrative is based upon a "hard days work", that it is "noble" somehow, not realizing that nobody has gotten truly wealthy working for someone else. They are quick to point fingers at the wealthy. Entrepreneurs, the truly successful ones, that 0.001%, do put in a hard days work, probably more hours than anyone, suffer more rejection than anyone, the people who have an insane level of drive, the people who persevere and are highly adaptive, these are the people who rise to the top. People are quick to point out that someone with billions in wealth are somehow "evil", without any concept of the work and rejection to get there, even the ones who got there through advantageous loopholes, NGOs, and criminal activity. They are just jealous and envious of the differences, and it gets twisted into some sort of distorted moral argument. I don't blame these wealthy elites for my lot in life. I don't want their money. I don't pay any attention to them. I take care of myself and my family. I rose from literally nothing with a lot of hard work and discomfort. It's my responsibility, not anyone else's.
It's this same mindset that I have,
"I worked hard and earned my money, therefore you can't just have it." that makes me a capitalist, versus a socialist. People with a hand out, whining and complaining, create a rotten taste in my mouth. I have zero empathy for able-bodied people, diverting responsibilities, who make a choice not to contribute to society. Parasites. However, my tune will likely change if the realities of a robot-based workforce transform the landscape, because I know that there must be a driving force behind any economy and survival of any society. A corporate tax structure that pumps money into the economy on the front end, while the masses spending that money on goods and services pumps it back into the corporations on the back end. It's a reciprocity-based economy that keeps the wheel turning. What we don't need is a bloated governmental bureaucracy, full of corruption, that sucks up all the money and doesn't funnel the majority back to the people, which is a huge concern right now, because this is exactly what we have, trillions of tax payer dollars being skimmed off the top in waste, fraud, and abuse by nefarious bureaucrats, NGOs, criminals, and politicians.
