Arthur, your commentary on values is nuanced and deep–what is the foundation of values? As you suggest, relativism is not a solid foundation, yet to some degree relativism is the core of Modernism.
Quality is precisely what's been lost: the quality of physical tools/appliance, and the quality of time, which is now scarce for those trying to keep up with multiple devices/tasks/duties.
I suppose my point is that values–(no asterisk, heh)–are to some degree built or torn down by the incentives of whatever system we're participating in. If the system encourages deception, cheating, free-riding, exploitation, etc., then participants will either join the party or they will choose not to participate. For example, the mortgage origination /MBS packaging industry circa 2002-2008.
Systems that encourage collaboration, transparency, productivity, etc., and that disincentivize deception, exploitation, free-riding, etc. encourage a much different set of values. People tend to assign the blame for failed systems to human nature, but it's the system that generates behaviors and choices based on what the system incentivizes.
As for capital being abundant–Chipshot, your point is well-taken–what we might call "real" wealth/capital is eroding. Much of the 'wealth/capital" is phantom wealth–assets whose value has been pumped up or is kept on the books at inflated levels.
I think Spence is referring to credit as capital, because to the owner of a business buying robots, cheap credit is almost as good as actual cash. The cost to use cash is zero, but if the cost to borrow capital is 1%, hey, that's almost as good as cash. This is the logic of stock buy-backs–since credit is so cheap, let's borrow a ton of money and boost our stock price, which is an asset we can sell.
the bottom line is capital (cash) earns nothing, which is why people like Warren Buffett are buying railroads, canned food companies, etc.–real enterprises with income streams. That's what scarce: reliable income streams…