I know socialist sentiments aren't very popular on Hacker News, but some form of wealth redistribution is going to be _necessary_ in a couple of years if the richest continue getting richer (which they will, due to technological advancement) and automation becomes so efficient that most simple jobs disappear. A considerable part of the population will simply be unable to do meaningful work in the private sector. The Luddite argument will eventually be dead, at least for certain groups in society. So the choice is letting them starve, or subsidize them somehow.
How this "wealth redistribution" should happen is an entirely different question, but a flat tax rate including on capital (very hard to implement in practice) or simply flat taxation of everyone above a certain, very high net worth are possibilities.
Note that certain countries already have de facto subsidy systems for low-income/unemployable groups already, e.g. Norway.
The rich always kept getting richer over the years and the poor kept getting poorer. There's nothing new here.
Eventually, we all die. Plus business models and companies get disrupted by technology all the time.
taxation of everyone above a certain, very high
net worth are possibilities
In my country the contribution for health-care is 5.5% of my income. This means that I'm paying 10-20 times more than people that sit on their asses all day, doing nothing and complaining about budget cuts.
Giving money to the poor is not the solution. It just encourages sloth.
I believe most first-world economies have some form of wealth redistribution[1].
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistribution_of_wealth