Some Paragraphs
These are for the literature review. It's about two and a half pages double spaced, but it feels too short.

Economics are important. They can determine whether times are good or bad, and have done so for as long as economies have existed. Capitalism, the primary economic system of the world since society itself began, has worked reasonably well, seeing we're here today. It has done at least "well enough," though how much more has been debated--some see it as a superior system, while others see it as becoming increasingly obsolete. One of capitalism's fundamental concepts is that people work to allow themselves to survive. People can do a variety of things, but the important part is that it's their hard work that makes them successful. Capitalism gives people the incentive to work, which is one reason it has done better than, say, Stalinism (communism in the Soviet Union), where people had no incentive to work. This is something considered a positive property of capitalism--we'd all like to think that we could all be rich if we just worked hard enough, right? Some examinations have shown the case to be otherwise, however [Class in America]. Multiple causes could be attributed to this fact--overpopulation, corruption, exploitation, foolish leadership, or the "evil forces of the universe." No matter the base cause, the result is always some kind of economical trouble. Another possible cause, perhaps unsuspected (or not), could be technology. Technology has had all sorts of effects on the economy, some positive, some negative. "Simple" technologies that we may take for granted, such as laundry machines, do make our lives easier. However, the relatives of this type of machine have more complex effects. Technology creates machines that do things people originally did by hand. These machines reduce the need for human labor. What twenty men can do with shovels, one man can do with a Cat* (large digging vehicle thing). This means that nineteen of those men with shovels need to find new work. Fortunately for them, there were plenty of things to do, as society didn't have everything. When society started to have "too much," problems arose, as there weren't as many jobs. Society recovered, as people created new things to do and new ways to make their livelihoods. However, it's a possibility that a problem could arise in the future, one with three possible outcomes and no chance of full recovery.

A "precursor" to the problem existed with the Industrial Revolution. A modern version exists today. In the United States, many Americans complain that they can't find jobs because they're being outsourced to other countries and are being taken by immigrants [source]. While this may be bad for American workers, it's good for workers of other countries. This is because the number of jobs in the world stays the same overall; the only changes are for the two countries. This doesn't hurt the world (at least not directly). But what if jobs were outsourced into the void, to nowhere? What if they just disappeared? Technology has the potential to do this. What would we do then, if no one had work to do, but those who owned the machines had everything the world would ever need?

A situation a bit less extreme than this example occurred with the Industrial Revolution. Machines and factories were created, and they boosted production [some statistic?]. The world was producing more than ever before, yet so many people had almost nothing. The world's population was increasing, but that's not everything. Many [most?] people who lived on farms four hundred years ago lived in better conditions than the people who lived in cities 90 to 120 years ago, yet the world had more of almost everything physical. Along with this, skilled craftsmen were replaced and displaced by factory workers. One person on a machine could produce as much fabric or clothing as [a number] of tailors could make by hand. This means less people were needed for producing fabrics, textiles, and clothing overall. People adapted though, and new jobs were created.

What if 90% of the jobs went away? What if machines did nearly all of the work? That would mean that the world would have enough food and materials for humans to survive, but no one would have anything, as no one could work to earn it. This would obviously be a problem. This could recreate what happened in the past, but many times worse. The three results may be the end of capitalism, human extinction (which is relatively unlikely; mass population reduction is more likely), or technological regression (which is extremely unlikely without the population of humans going extremely low).


What's Known

The Industrial Revolution was an event that introduced automated production. It would be small compared to what could happen.

Technology has replaced production workers mainly. It could theoretically replace many others, including engineers, those who repair things, some social workers, and those that even design new technology (see technological singularity, I believe).

Having machines do jobs is like outsourcing to nowhere--no one benefits from it except whoever needs the job done. There is no worker to benefit from doing work.. This creates a negative total.

No jobs means no capitalism.  This forces a move to an entirely new economic system, which could be similar to communism, but doesn't have to be it. Communism could work assuming we have an uncorrupted leadership (which is difficult). It doesn't have to be communism though. [Also to my knowledge: I'm not plotting to overthrow the government and make the planet a communistic dictatorship under my control. You're not allowed to assume that I am. This is for you. You know who you are.]

There's already a problem with there not being enough jobs. It can't be because "the world doesn't have enough money." There's probably enough food in the world to feed everyone. However, there are three problems: people wasting around 30-50% of it, distribution, and "Get your hands off my food, it's mine and not yours."

Unrelated solution: Sterilize a significant portion of the population. It'll be lower within 50 years guaranteed. Or people can be educated to be less selfish and more open-minded.

If whoever is reading this (you) finds any typos, feel free to say so.