[Lazare]

What you're talking about is the economic concept of "labor productivity". If we can use factories and automation to create the same amount of stuff with fewer people, then our productivity will rise. If it rises fast enough, then we could have more stuff per person even with fewer people working. Problem solved!

Except: Productivity growth has historically never been high enough to bail us out of the hole we're in, and it has been trending down in recent years for reasons we don't fully understand.

> our material abundance isn't particularly under threat from contraction of the work force.

I wish!

[maxerickson]

I'm not talking about productivity growth at all, I'm pointing out that economic productivity is not evenly distributed throughout the economy. Losing 10% of farm acreage would be a disaster for quality of life. Losing 10% of fastfood stores would barely matter.