Here is an article on how recent historians believe that English male height during the Industrial Revolution went down due to malnutrition:
https://www.economist.com/free-exchange/2013/09/13/did-livin...
Historians now think the Industrial Revolution was a giant economic boom where the majority of individuals actually became poorer.
Here is an Indiana University paper, consistent with the findings of others, that automation did reduce manufacturing jobs
> The basic takeaway from the Ball State work is that both forces—offshoring and automation—are in play in the massive occupational realignment due to hit the U.S. economy, but automation is dominant (Wells, 2017). This assessment, that automation is the greater threat, is consistent with their earlier work placing the loss of manufacturing employment on increases in productivity
https://www.ibrc.indiana.edu/ibr/2018/fall/article2.html
This was all around the Trump years when the media and academia were happy to say “China didn’t do it”. Even the NYtimes said it at the time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs...
Yes we can find jobs for people if we keep trying. But the jobs that we find in a post-scarcity services society are often precarious and meaningless - and people know it. Agriculture and manufacturing, which are the two job categories that really matter, do lose jobs to automation because we are squeezing them for profits all the time through all available methods.
To say that everything will be hunky dory with AI is just the same as saying the steam engine won’t take your job. That was BS in the 1800s and it’s BS now. And yes people did lose their way of life and they did become poorer, as demonstrated by the current studies on the matter.