Yes, thank you, that is exactly my point. The nature of creative work (the kind that is least likely to be automated) is that the output can be highly variable (think Botticelli's paintings vs 99% of everyone else), and thus it is impossible with that type of work to create a broad base of jobs where lots of people (percentage-wise) are well compensated.

Another way to think of it is not just "repetitive vs non-repetitive" jobs, but "variable vs. well defined output" jobs. It may be currently very difficult to become a radiologist, but at the end of the day a diagnosis is either accurate or it isn't, and those types of "right-or-wrong" jobs are the ones most amenable to automation. So what you're left with are non-automatable jobs where the output can be highly variable, and in those highly-variable output jobs all the gains go to the very best.