In such a case, will the concept of money be wiped out from existence ?
Depends on how much of our needs would be covered. Not needing to work to survive is different from not needing to work to live a comfortable life which is again different from living a luxurious life.
As someone who wholeheartedly supports Universal Basic Income, it should not let a person live a life of luxury. UBI should buy away all the poor though
Our perception of poverty and luxury would rapidly change. Food and roof over head alone would quickly be considered inadequate.
Just look how in the rich parts of the world we consider running water, sewage, electricity and internet as something non-negotiable. In some places those are still luxury.
It’s called Star Trek
Well, if you knew that for the rest of your life you would have a home, clothing, food and water, internet and some spending money, what would you do with your time?
Many people would probably just relish doing nothing productive at all, like most animals in nature do when they have no immediate needs.
All that free time would probably inspire a renaissance of art and philosophy, probably personal education too, after all, you can do plenty of thinking on various topics if you have all day to do whatever you are in the mood for. But ultimately we would still need a real outlet for our creative and constructive urges, a way to meaningfully occupy our time.
Ultimately we would need a true common cause again that everyone can share in, like Starfleet in Trek is for mankind. A new frontier, exploration and discovery like humanity has not known since we first started sailing our oceans to seek out the unknown. And not just for elite astronauts, for everyone.
Would depend how it’s achieved. The most realistic way would be through mass automation, but the question is now “who owns the machines that produce everything?” A minority controlling these means of production would mean the rest of the world is at their mercy. If they manage to maintain their ownership (though a fully automated defense force, I guess), they can have the rest of the world doing whatever they want… But what do they need these people for then? All they are is a threat, as they are prone to revolt. Genocide seems like a handy option if the elites are sufficiently ruthless, but it would be hard to put in place; there are many people in the world and they can be inventive when fighting for their lives. Beside, there would probably be several such elite groups, still divided in different country; one who starts building large armies and stacking weapons might attract hostility from their neighbors. Providing the people with their needs to pacify them? Sure, but what if they want more? Or what if they make their own automated armies with the free time they have not worrying about starvation? Keeping them occupied seems safer. Why not invent some bogus job that doesn’t actually need to be done and have them believe they still need to earn their living? That could solve the problem from the elite’s point of view. So basically, no change for the people.
With collective ownership of the means of production and an egalitarian spread of wealth, it could be cool tho. People would just do whatever they want, many would still probably undertake collective project, either to further better life of for the fun of it. There could still be forms of conflicts about how some things are managed and by whom, tho…
We’d be forced to anyway