> we are all parasites living off of the labor of the machines
but some parasites are more equal than others - namely, those who owns the machines.
You might ask, why do some own the machines (or means of production), while others dont? Its not a question i m in authority or knowledgable enough to answer, but my take on it is that its a snowball effect - once you gain enough capital (or, as i called it above - means of production), you can effectively get other people's productivity as a lever to increase your own. Note, only those who already have capital can do this - people who cannot accrue capital either take big gambles (like borrowing lots of money without being able to pay it back, if they can borrow it at all). Or they just don't do it, and remain status quo. Either way, the only option left for them is to live or work. Thus the cycle perpetuates, and this is the "cause" of the wealth divide - not because some people worked harder, but because opportunities don't come knocking equally.
In aa he world where automation is completely replaced all labour, either everyone is capable of being an owner, and thus, all profit to be made using automation is so thin you don't get much of an advantage doing it compared to someone else. Or, some small group basically owns all means of production, and essentially owns the world and everyone in it (either via their power to control resource supply, since they own it!), or indirectly via lobby/"taxes" they pay that the rest of the meeples gets to live off.
I m hoping the first scenario comes to pass, but i highly doubt it. Looking at the world now, its much more likely that the 2nd scenario comes to pass.