On a global scale, the extent of automation will always be limited by the amount of savings available from productive jobs to invest in the automation equipment. The "automation" itself should not be demonized, it is just another tool for making things at lower cost/effort.
For ancient humans the stone axe made most jobs (hunting and building shelters) twice as efficient, therefore it "destroyed half the jobs". So was the axe a bad thing?

Automation is a tool that allows more work per person. The same was true of tools of the past. This one may be a revolution, like the agricultural or industrial revolution. But it's not the end of people doing working. People will need to do new kinds of work, consistent with the new tools. This is just like people leaving farms to work in industrial jobs in the industrial revolution.

Automation is increasing return on investment and decreasing return on labor. This will lead to calls for various forms of socialism. Socialism will seem more reasonable to people who would reject it categorically, if it weren't for the changes associated with automation.

If you couple automation with AI then all bets are off. If the AI product is a self learner and self modifying type, then the only new jobs it will create are for other AI. Humans won't be able to compete. They can't think as fast or retain as much information (read as data) as the AI.
The only hope for numanity would be for them to reach the Singularity (Ray Kurzweil term) and become cyborgs. Thus ends humanity.

As I think about the future of automation, I keep coming back to this idea. Philosophically, I don't like it, people should work to produce the goods they use. That's the way its always been. But is it the way it will always be? If enough goods and services can be generated to provide a "middle class" living for everyone on the planet with the labor of less than 5% of humans working, what do the other 95% do? Do we run automated factories to produce piles of goods while people starve in the streets?

Now there ate those who say that automation doesn't remove jobs, it creates new ones just as fast. And certainly that has been true in the past, but automation has typically been used in the realm of repetitive specific work. Weaving, assembly etc. Automation is terrible at things that require human judgement, like cleaning a hotel room.

But the next wave of automation will be general purpose AI. These machines won't be designed to solve specific problems, they will be designed to do what people can do. And they'll be cheaper.

So do we require business to hire people they don't need at higher pay than a robot would require? Do we hire people to do make-work jobs such as digging holes and filling them back up again? Or filling out forms and having other people hired to file them (wait, we already do that). Or do we find some other way for people to obtain the goods the automated factories are producing.