There are always diminishing returns to money spent on consumption, but technological progress creates new products that expand what money can buy. For example, no amount of money in 1990 was enough to buy an iPhone.
More abstractly, there are two effects from AGI-driven growth: moving to a further point on the utility curve such that the derivative is lower, and new products increasing the derivative at every point on the curve (relative to what it was on the old curve). So even if in the future the lifestyles of people with no savings and no labor income will be way better than the lifestyles of anyone alive today, they still might be far worse than the lifestyles of people in the future who own a lot of capital.
If you feel this post misunderstands what it is responding to, can you link to a good presentation of the other view on these issues?
There are always diminishing returns to money spent on consumption, but technological progress creates new products that expand what money can buy. For example, no amount of money in 1990 was enough to buy an iPhone.
More abstractly, there are two effects from AGI-driven growth: moving to a further point on the utility curve such that the derivative is lower, and new products increasing the derivative at every point on the curve (relative to what it was on the old curve). So even if in the future the lifestyles of people with no savings and no labor income will be way better than the lifestyles of anyone alive today, they still might be far worse than the lifestyles of people in the future who own a lot of capital.
If you feel this post misunderstands what it is responding to, can you link to a good presentation of the other view on these issues?