Interesting perspective. I wonder if we are working under the assumption that it is so grand that working for someone/something is so super great! I happen to enjoy my work and am grateful that it pays my way. But does everyone need to conform to that model? Dog walking can be fun and rewarding and those dogs DO need to be walked. It’s also great exercise. So what if it doesn’t change the world? It’s going to make that dog and its owners really happy. We need dog walkers. We need repairmen/women. We need role players. Who’s to say that Person B walking the dog for Person A doesn’t free up Person A’s time so they can work on a new form of energy production that reduces our dependency on fossil fuels? There’s nobility and value in even mundane work. Consult any Zen monk on that. Part of why the sharing economy (I also loathe that term but that’s the one that’s sticking) exists: people are willing in a free market to offer up their time or resources to fill a need. No one is putting them on a slave ship and forcing them to work or holding them down so they can’t progress. That said, if everyone were A-Players, there’d be no one left to do B-work, which still needs to get done. Maybe we need a better way to value B-work and appreciate it? And one could argue that B/C-work can be technologically solved (which I think is where your argument is leading) but not always at a cost that can be justified. Maybe it’ll come, but that day hasn’t arrived yet and in the meantime, we still need to get through life as we know it.