I ask this, because a variant of this is often a "parable" of communist thought, and it seemed to "echo" from the "money generated by N people" that you said above, at least to me.
Regardless of how flawed the conclusion drawn from that "parable" is, it still brings up an important point: We severely undervalue human capital. That's one of the biggest problems with capitalism that I can see. (That and the mistaken notion that the purpose of business is to make as much money as possible. No, the purpose is the fair and equitable exchange of goods, services, and/or currency.)
It's kinda weird, mass produced capital comes off the line with a kind of built-in "union" of sorts. Every Chevy off the line is part of a "Chevy union of automobiles", with all the collective bargaining that comes with that. Generally speaking, none of those vehicles are going to rush out to undercut all the others. Every time human labor has been replaced by robot labor, the robots came with a union. They get paid up front (unless they're rented, or have a maintenance contract), but they still got collective bargaining.
It's not a perfect analogy, since robots and cars aren't human, but humans need more advocates standing up for just how much human capital is worth, and how little people get paid, mainly because people are ready and willing to severely undercut each other, because you have to work to live. Even though Chevy has competition with Ford, Subaru, and others, they're still looking for the long term, and no one in the car business is interested in having the price move so low that it's unsustainable. However, there are a lot of humans willing to take unsustainable jobs, just because that's better than nothing.
And, getting back to the subject at hand, big corporations very often have a vested interest in keeping human capital undervalued, and will often use their money to fund a political voice demanding that we continue to undervalue human capital. So I see
@PatrThom 's point, that the money these workers should be valued at is going to speak in the political realm, very often against the worker's best interests.
