Luxury or Laziness?

In Brian Merchant's article, "Fully Automated Luxury Communism," the idea of a future in which technology leads services in our society is envisioned. According to the article this dream has been around for centuries and is on it's way toward becoming a reality. As much as it sounds like the ideal position for citizens, this utopian demand for complete automation is going to be the exact problem that causes poverty in our nation. The robots and machines described are doing all of what would have been the blue-collared work that our working and lower class citizens survive off of. In turn, this would leave the blue-collared workers without jobs, without income, and without any ability to climb the social ladder as most do not have the skill levels to advance. This dramatic progression in technology would widen the wealth distribution gap by filling the middle class jobs with robots that do not get an hourly wage. The rest of the work available would be either the dirty work or the corporate owners. Merchant says that this mental image would not focus on the profit, but instead on the people. By this, he implies that it is purely to benefit people's lives and make them more efficient. However, no where in his article does he explain the economic difference it would make on the nation nor attempt to disprove this. The reader is not able to understand how this would affect them more personally in the long run. It seems to be more an immature dream that just emerged and has not yet developed. The author goes on to depict "The demand would be a 10- or 12- hour working week, a guaranteed social wage...," but does not describe or even touch on the subject of how this would properly and successfully get done. This "social wage" has to come from somewhere and if the companies are making as much profit as they are minimally paying laborers, who's to say they would want to pay them any more for less of their time?