At which point you run headlong into the paradox of productivity.
If you don't hire and pay the humans, then who is going to have the income to buy the output?
And then after that you have the problem of why anybody should operate the machines for longer than they need to provide what they require. There's a great belief amongst technologists that they can distribute output to everybody, but that still requires somebody to work longer hours than they need to provide for themselves. Why should they work Fridays to produce output for everybody else? After all those they are providing for can no longer produce anything of material value in exchange.
Until you have machines doing absolutely everything, there will need to be policies in place to ensure that the 'socially necessary labour' is distributed in terms of hours. Otherwise the default is a slave class who have most of their machine enhanced output confiscated for the benefit of other people simply to ensure they continue to work the 40 hour weeks necessary to produce all the output without the machines failing.
And if that labour requires incredibly high skill that only those with IQs over 140 can provide, then we have a fundamental problem. Collectively we can't give these people anything more to get them to work all those hours. They can provide for themselves all they materially need with the machines.
As Ali put it, "service to others is the rent we pay for our room here on earth". If we can no longer be of service to others, then we can't make the rent.
Shuffling money around doesn't fix that basic issue. I use up some of my finite life to help you because you are using up some of your finite life to help me.