This succinctly sums up your comment. Perhaps if you gave OP the benefit of the doubt, you'd understand he's trying to fix things in a distributed manner, rather than thinking everybody can be rescued with top-down omniscience.
Like any complex problem, there probably isn't a simple solution. Its not a binary issue of 'personal responsibility' vs 'central government', theres room for central, state & local governments as well as charities, communities, and companies to work together on this.
There's really two independent facets to this subject. One is about the immediate state of things, which in the US is regulation artificially lowering the amount of jobs available (even minimum wage does this). The blog post does a good job exploring this.
The second, which you seem more concerned about, is the trends of whether these types of jobs will continue to exist at all in the future. Which I will agree is questionable.
The US basically has an accelerated view of the effects of automation, as outsourcing to cheaper countries has identical effects. Furthermore, our poor lack the table stakes for participation in our highly-regulated economy, as explored in the original post.
I would point to broken employment and monetary policy that are actively further screwing up the economy and fostering the current go-big-or-stay-home environment. If we really have gotten much more productive, why is the standard "full time" workweek 40+ hours and not 15?
"I'm just pointing out that the jobs are here and those folks simply refuse to do them."
Problem is that this is a phenomena you see everywhere regardless of system but in all liberal markets.
The only thing thats consistent is the technology.
The problem when you remove regulation (uber) you end up with lots of jobs that pay less until as with Uber they will all be automated away.
This is the problem and ignoring it by trying to use the typical "there are plenty of jobs" as the Author does is simply refusing to deal with the reality as it is IMO.