I did not even think of avoiding anything. I simply disagree with the static modeling of economics. No adjustments, no adaptation, never-before-seen circumstances (I also disagree with that, the industrial revolution is a great analog worthy of your study).
It does seem like you want to avoid the obvious -- if things really are dire as you predict, the 1% would have no wealth, as there would be virtually no functioning economy and thus all their holdings would be worthless. What is a stock portfolio or any other asset worth if there is no economy? What do the 1% own that has any value in a dead economy?
I guess I just don't care what they do with their own money, what they do with their legal earnings, and I don't care what they do with their lives. I don't want anyone arbitrarily deciding you or I have "too much." If you want some of my earnings, produce something I want and you can earn it -- I will hand it to you in exchange. Create a smart business and I will invest in you and provide growth for you and your associates. Mutually beneficial, no force involved.
Imagine the positive world coming where the average -- no, every -- person has access to ultra-affordable necessities and a happy standard of living. That is possible with greater efficiency leaps through technical advances. That is a brighter future, my friend. It requires work, adaptation involves effort. But it is positive.
Automation will create more wealthy people, who cares? Freedom includes the potential to serve millions or billions and earn money from the ones your serve, voluntarily. Great. We can't let that deter us from the overall improvement of the world that's possible.