Because if significant amounts of the workforce are replaced there's an implicit assumption that a significant amount of things would be cheaper to provider, if the only cost of creating and supplying food is robot maintenance that means food should be significantly cheaper to produce than now.

Coming 2046: P2P food sharing.

> Because if significant amounts of the workforce are replaced there's an implicit assumption that a significant amount of things would be cheaper to provider

That's a wild assumption. I would predict that it's more likely all that additional value will be captured by already-rich business owners and shareholders, not consumers.

> I would predict that it's more likely all that additional value will be captured by already-rich business owners and shareholders, not consumers.

If you are concerned about that, lobby to create laws that make it easy for consumers to invest their money into this kind of undertaking.

What money are the unemployed going to invest?

There is a lot between "insanely rich" and "no money".

History indicates otherwise, no?

I don't think food and manufactured 'stuff' has ever been cheaper relative to median wages than it is now.