No, there is corruption, but it's better disguised and hidden in the US than in other countries (because otherwise it'd be caught, and no one committing the crimes wants that). People are wicked the world over. Why should it be any different in the US than elsewhere? When people don't have a moral compass, they are free to do as they choose. We have in the US some humanitarian traces of Christianity, some influences of Buddhism, some traces of other things, but in reality, the only ethical tethers politicians have these days is the shame of being caught. It's easier to get caught in a semi-transparent government like the US. In Russia? Nope. People like Putin can do all kinds of things without the populous knowing.

> The situation we're in is a result of people acting rationally within a set of rules that were predicated on some assumptions that are no longer true, like that the demand for labor is essentially infinite.

IBYP? I don't know anyone who thinks the demand for labor is infinite. I can see in your next paragraph, you're jumping the gun and thinking about a robotic society, but hang on there, cowboy (a pun on your last line). While such a shift in system may seem necessary in light of such a future, you're still thinking about economics in terms of how the system will improve things. It's natural for most people on HN to be the rationally-minded architectural types, so they think systems will solve problems. But pause for a moment and consider: Which world would you rather live in:

A) A world where humans (and maybe robots) compete in the market place, where people pursue their own interests and ends in effort to "get ahead". i.e. The world we're headed for. And by the way, this world could be either capitalistic, socialistic, or communistic. The fact is, people will pursue their own interests regardless of the system.

B) A world where humans (and maybe robots) are supportive of each other, offering help to those in need, sharing resources, and seeking the well being of each other.

Yes, it's a leading question, but I think you'd agree world B is nicer. That's the one we want. However, that's the one that requires change in the MORAL AND ETHICAL CHARACTER of people, i.e. the part of people that says "Do good to your neighbor", "Help your neighbor buy groceries", "Help your neighbor fix his/her sink/tub/car", "Help teach your neighbor's kids", as opposed to selfish mentality of "Pay the Stanford coach to let your kid be admitted ahead of other kids" and "When the balance is in your favor, say nothing" and "Make the poor pukes be the garbage man while I, privileged individual, get the high-paying executive role". The fact is, if everyone supported each other, we'd all be ahead by now. But then each person gets the idea that they'll let OTHER people be helpful while THEY get ahead, and the whole thing collapses.

In short, unselfishness would work. And before you object and say it won't happen here (which is quite plausible and very likely), you can't say it NEVER works. For example, Tokyo is one of the safest places in the world due to the underlying philosophical foundations of Japan that taught people to rely on the good of society. It worked for a while (although in more recent times, these philosophical foundations are decaying, so more violence is prevalent, and notably, the reliance on society was directed inwardly (towards the Japanese) not outwardly (towards foreigners), otherwise they wouldn't have been part of WWII). It's a complicated story, and I'm not expounding much. I'm also talking too long and you're going to want to stop reading.

tl;dr - It's a human problem, not a problem of the system we have.