This is the headline "Musk says that in 10 to 20 years, work will be optional and money will be irrelevant thanks to AI and robotics". The article... " http://tiny.cc/ezuz001

Anyone who has followed Elon's career will know that he's almost always over optimistic in this time-frames. So 10-20 years is probably closer to 15-30 years.

What he's talking about here is an extension of the theory of Superabundance. The idea isn't new having been covered in the book 'Superabundance' by Tupy and Pooley which talked about an "Infinitely Bountiful Planet". This was in turn derived from the work of the economic great Julian Simon (he of the Ehrlich bet) which is summarised in his book 'The Ultimate Resource', (meaning humans). The notion goes back even further to Azimov who prophesied a planet where all human needs were completely fulfilled with minimal effort.

The idea revolves around Simon's calculation of Time-Price. This is the amount of time someone has to work to obtain a given good. The most startling example of that was that, in 1800, the average worker had to put in 5 hours of labour to earn enough for one hour of after-dark light via candles. Now they must work less than 1 second to run a light for one hour. Using similar methodology, lamb is 85% cheaper (in terms of Time-Price) than 1980, Salmon 81%, Coffee 74% etc etc.

As things become increasing cheaper to make, the amount of work time required to buy a representative basket of goods in 1980, ifs cut by 2/3rds in 2025. So, people work less to get the same amount of goods and as robots and AI make work even more productive, the work required to meet the average needs of the population plummets to the point where it is effectively zero.
I don’t think any of us on this forum will be around to see it (although medicine is advancing at a comparable pace to other industries) but what a world it’ll be. Ordinary people in 2060 living a life the richest of the rich only dreamed about in 1960.

Sounds great, if you believe in unicorns.

"I do not know yesterday, I only know today" -BUDDHA.

It reflects the central message found in the Bhaddekaratta Sutta (MN 131), where the Buddha teaches that one should not chase after the past or place expectations on the future, but rather live fully in the present.

2060! Will the average Old Fart be living to 120? Me thinks not.

more on the Simon Abundance index....
http://humanprogress.org/the-simon-abundance-index-2025/

I must admit an intriguing concept which got me searching. If I am allowed to reproduce these points from
https://lessonsummaries.com/superabundance-why-more-people-means-more-prosperity/
without violating copyright.

Key Takeaways
1. Human beings are not a burden—they are the ultimate resource.
2. More people means more minds, more ideas, and faster progress.
3. Scarcity is relative and often solved through innovation.
4. Time prices are a powerful way to measure real-world abundance.
5. Freedom and markets unleash the ingenuity needed to thrive.
6. Optimism, rooted in data and human creativity, is not naïve—it’s rational.
________________________________________
I only have questions / concerns with 3 of these statements.
Human beings are not a burden—they are the ultimate resource.
Yes, all very well and good, so long as they aren’t exploited and are truly valued as the ‘ultimate resource’. IMO there is a huge chance that this will not happen, as history has clearly demonstrated that many have not be valued over successive eras.
And
Time prices are a powerful way to measure real-world abundance.
Is this just another way for figures to be manipulated to prove your point of view? After all, there are lies, damn lies and an economist quoting statistics.
And
Optimism, rooted in data and human creativity, is not naïve—it’s rational.
I can understand why ‘Optimism’ might be a bit scarce on the ground at the moment. Human greed, stubbornness and lack of empathy for others desperately needs to be overcome for any of this utopian dream to ever eventuate. It hasn’t happened yet in human history, so good luck with that one.

mhaze,
It won't work because the rich and powerful maintain that status from profits made off the backs of others, and those profits require scarcity, not abundance.
I'm not arguing that it isn't possible, I'm arguing that it isn't realistic.