The consequence of this is that everyone who derives their income from labor rather than return on capital is screwed. There are only two choices: invest enough to become financially independent (and hope that you can do it before you lose your career to automation), or hope that society sees fit to redistribute wealth so that those without control of capital don't starve.
The catch-22 is that the people whose occupations are most in danger from automation are also those with the lowest capacity for investing...
I've reached the same conclusions, but it is worth noting a few points that should alter the outcome:
- the whole system is unsustainable without a sufficient wealth base to sustain consumption
- those who control capital do not yet fully control the state
- serious alternatives (e.g. minimum income) have been proposed to deal with these issues while allowing markets to continue functioning
I find it extremely likely that those in power will ultimately realize that they are better off when the needs of all are met, enabling a compromise wherein some form of minimum income/welfare ensures comfort for all. The transition could be smooth, or it could be bloody, but I don't see how it's avoidable in the long-run.
Historically, this is the progression we have observed in the welfare state.