Yes, but in my hypothetical scenario everyone is both very intelligent and very educated. The problem is, whoops, we still unglamorous work to be done and there still aren't enough cushy jobs for everyone.
Supply and demand. If no one wants to do a job, that employer will need to offer more, raising the demand, since supply is low.
It makes perfect sense that you don't know this since you seem completely misinformed about capitalism, judging by what you've said here in other replies:
> "The whole foundation of capitalism is growth"
The foundation of capitalism is savings, which is something current mainstream Economics thinks is evil (it only recognizes investment and consumption as good things to do with money, and saving is bad for Keynesians because they think if you know the price of food will be cheaper tomorrow, you won't eat today).
> "Yeah, [ever increasing consumption and resources being finite are] the inherent contradiction of capitalism"
Capitalism needs resources to be scarce in order to be a coherent system. Communists are the ones to whom resources being finite (and hence creating the need for a system of allocation of those resources, namely the price system in Capitalism) is a contradiction, which is why it never works (without price there's no way to know where to allocate resources).
The problem is that certain jobs create scenarios with imperfect information. The society of rational actors is a useful model, but so is a war of all against all.
Smart people aren't immune to principal-agent problems. The 2008 crisis was created by exactly the smart people we're trying to be. We shouldn't stop trying, but neither should we be deluded that that is sufficient.
Nobody wants to be a garbage man now either, but if the choices are that or complete destitution it starts to look better. I'm sure you did well in freshman econ, though.
