Maybe the machines won’t come for venture/angels but I certainly won’t bet on it.
It didn’t save them when the bots came.
That's an odd thing to say. If machines and programs are capital, which seems reasonable, the more automation there is, the more capital, which drives down the returns and makes labor relatively more expensive. Isn't this obviously happening in a world where savings accounts pay 0.01% but it costs $120/hr to hire a plumber?
Maybe it would be better to say that the extremely low returns on capital favor automation, which favors the people who make the highest wages. That's obviously? not the same as capital vs. labor.
This continues as technology gets more sophisticated until the only people left producing things and making money are those that own the tools that do the job.
It only costs $120/hr to hire a plumber because of artificial barriers to entry and a guaranteed market. A better example might be a typist who previously had a solid middle class job taking notes and dealing with faxes because their boss didn't have a cheaper way to do it.
That is what I mean by favoring. Eventually Bezos just owns a machine that runs everything he controls and needs no employees. Eventually. Don't doubt he would if he could.
Your statement contains the core of it though -- systems that favor the people who make the highest wages are in an unstable equilibrium where eventually very very few people make all the wages.