I feel like there is some confusion over this point. Just to be clear, historically, economists have believed that technology doesn’t get rid of jobs. What I’m saying is that right now that assumption is being tested by new schools of thought, and for the purpose of this piece, I am going to assume that technology (and robots) do eliminate jobs. (Or, as you put it, workers are given an alternative job which they find absolutely repugnant.) I’m not sure if you read until the end, but my ultimate argument is that we need to guarantee a baseline standard of living for everyone so that when these jobs are lost, the workers do not suffer — ideally for the short term, but theoretically for the long term as well.