I think that's, at best, a twisting of any economic theory I've ever read.

As a software engineer, I have a skill that is fairly valuable in today's economy, and yet I've had a number of clients - mostly startups and small businesses looking to add automation - where I never added any real economic value to the organization at all. I'd work with the client, trust their domain expertise, build a solution to the problem they had, and then watch as no one ever used it.

And yet, this is an important facet of capitalism - investments that fail. In the age of globalization and automation, entrepreneurs have an out-sized advantage over employees. The ones that fail are effectively working "bullshit jobs", but the ones that succeed grow the economy many times what was lost from the failures.

That, in effect, is why Keynes's 15-hour work week didn't materialize. The value of the extra productivity went to the entrepreneurs and their investors, which in turn tilted the playing field even further toward entrepreneurs and investors.

The good news: the barriers to entrepreneurship shrink further and further every cycle of productivity increase. 10 years ago you could start a business with a laptop and some coding knowledge, and build an app or a website that could be worth millions. Now, you can start your own television station with a smart phone and some niche domain knowledge, as YouTube and Patreon are proving.

As a result, there are going to be more and more people out there working for inevitable failures, but the winners are going to grow the economy for everyone.

So, eventually, everyone is going to become an entrepreneur, the singularity is going to make us irrelevant, or we're going to have to re-think how we distribute scarce resources.