> even those who experience the worst career disruption tend to end up better off within that time frame.

That hasn't been my observation at all. In the US, there are large swaths of the nation that still haven't recovered from the last similar event.

To add additional worry, the last time, everyone was told that the way out was to "upskill" into knowledge and service industries. Which a lot of people did, and those people were fine. But what are people to do this time? "Upskilling" back to physical jobs can only absorb so many workers, particularly since there aren't as many such jobs as there used to be.

This is all why I'm so concerned. I don't think history gives us any real reason to be optimistic here. In the very long term -- a couple of generations, say -- perhaps. But in the meantime? Even ignoring the ethics of some people deciding that others are expendable, the people being kicked to the curb will still have to find a way to eat, keep a roof over their head, etc.

If even 10-20% of the population can't do that, we're in big trouble.

All that said, nothing would make me happier than for you to be right and me to be wrong.

> People have been talking about the threat of automation since the very beginning of the industrial revolution.

And the prediction that only the ownership class would benefit from technological improvements is at least as old as Marx.