"The jobless future is less a reality to strive toward than the fantasy of technology investors"

The (almost) jobless future is an externality of competition to produce things most cheaply.

We must be careful not to conflate "jobs" and "work." We have been cursed to earn our daily bread by the sweat of our faces since way before medieval times. Hunter-gatherers ate what they killed or foraged, and craftsmen sold what they made. The issue is not whether we must have jobs, but, as Mr. Rushkoff rightly notes, whether we must "contribute."

The issue of work always come down to WHO will be allowed NOT to contribute (and, of course, what "contribute" means; do homemakers contribute?) We may not need more contribution, but we do need SOME contribution. Who will do it? Will we be able to automate ALL unpleasant necessary work? If not, who will do that work, and under what compulsion?