I was also thinking that. As an example, retail work seems to me to be a kind of hell I don't think I'd want to endure. But I know people that really enjoy it. So it's probably true of any job you might think is only done by those that are forced to.

I think, if AI and robotics replace most jobs. After some years of pain when capitalists enjoy the infinite money glitch they've discovered, there will either be a revolution or a natural coming to understand that things need to work differently.

Now, understand this would only work if the vast majority of work could be done via automation. In this case the vast majority of people would be able to pursue what they enjoy, a bit like the star trek anti-economy. If all remaining required jobs were no longer filled by those that volunteered to do them, there would be some kind of draft (think like jury duty), where people able to do a job have a chance to be called in to do it for a few months then released back to pursue their own interests.

I've always seen capitalism as the carrot on a stick we need, when we need human productivity from the vast majority of people. If that's no longer the case, it's not a suitable solution and all the ideas like universal basic income are just stopgap measures to try to eke a bit more time out of the capitalist system that has already run past the point where we can keep enough people usefully employed to make it work. That's almost certainly the reason we're seeing the huge wealth disparity that increases. As the productivity per person goes up, all the increased value only ever rises to the top.

Bit of a mini rant there, sorry about that.

Some yeah, but undoubtedly not enough to keep it working. For example i doubt that many people enjoy working at garbage disposable or basically any waste disposal. Of course these jobs should be fully operated by machines. Or any assistant jobs in manufacturing or jobs that operate in shifts.

I daresay there's a few people out there who might enjoy going into the sewers to manually remove the fatbergs, but probably not enough.

I build rockets that go on satellites and scientific missions. I enjoy my job; I find it extremely interesting and often quite fulfilling. In the grand scheme of things, I really wouldn't change much. But like my boss said on the first day of the job, "This job is awesome, but it's not worth doing for free." If you told me I could still enjoy the same level of comfort at home that my job affords me, but I wouldn't be paid, I would quit. I'd rather be at home reading, spending time with my family, playing around with my hobbies, etc.

My wife is a nurse. She loves her job, but she wouldn't do it for free either. Her love for the job prevents her from quitting when she's abused by the public for 12 hours, the pay makes her come in.

Some people are motivated by enjoyment alone to do jobs for free, but many are not. Or the thing they love doesn't help society in a meaningful way. Or they just don't want their hobby to turn into a job. I don't think there's a big enough overlap to have a functioning society.

Fair point, though i did try to use positive encouragement model to incentice people to work in not so enjoyable jobs. Even if not permanently, maybe in rotation.

Living in a nice society is all the motivation people need.

You might want to read up on the bystander effect. You do the dishes because no-one else is going to do it. But as soon as there are others who can do the job people will just stand around and let other die before they put in the effort.

Sure is a good thing doing this dishes is the most complicated and least-pleasant thing people can do...

Who's gonna volunteer to go through years of training specializing in commercial diving in wastewater to treatment plants for free?

But those were significantly smaller groups of people with significantly worse quality of life.
In addition the ones that got bigger naturally evolved centralized governing structures. Even before that all the groups had leaders or some group(elders) making decisions that can effect the whole group.

Cleaning a outhouse after 50 people from time to time, isn't that big of an issue and can be done just for the good of the whole group. It can be easily done in rotation or a group just gets together in an afternoon and digs a new one.

Doing the same after 100 000 up to 1 000 000+ people is in orders of magnitude more difficult and time consuming.

Same applies to any governing structure. Even the idea OP brought up needs a governing body of some sort to allocate resources and work plans.