For the sake of argument let's say I agree. But why aren't we automating away management and coordination tasks to empower workers? Or, why are we building systems that capture the value of the work we're automating away and funneling it up to the owners of capital, instead of distributing the value of those productivity gains to the people doing the work?

I'd say you have a bit of an idealistic/warped view of the world, and the inhabitants within it. Not everyone has the luxury of being so generous, or non-ambitious enough to not be competitive. You're arguing against a natural set of rules, and the effects that emerge from them.

If someone invents something that eliminates a task/work/something, then they won't pass on all those costs to the general public. Not unless it suits them to undercut competitors. And that's just one example. On the other hand, you also have business owners that regularly pass on savings to their customers, even when not necessary.

If they can manage to do that, good for them. But let's not impose our unrealistic ideals on free-thinking individuals "just because it's good".

I don't accept that competitive, winner-take-all behavior is at all "natural", and I don't think that's a sound argument.

I also don't think the systems we're building are a result of "free thinking", I think it has a lot more to do with what's getting funding.

> I don't accept that competitive, winner-take-all behavior is at all "natural"

You don't have to accept that the sky is blue either, but we are all the descendants of those who obtained the most resources for themselves and their offspring.