Has anyone actually convincingly argued that automation reduces the net number of jobs over time? My impression is that this belief entails a kind of parochialism about job loss, i.e., that it merely tracks the specific kinds or manifestations of jobs that automation has rendered obsolete while ignoring either the fact that particular occupations remain but now make use of new, more sophisticated methods, or the new jobs created by the needs and complexities introduced by new technologies.

Think of our ancestors. How many occupations were there? Arguably fewer than we have today. Certainly, your great grandmother had to wash the dishes herself, but we didn't have factory workers at dishwasher manufacturing plants, dishwasher repairmen, dishwasher dealers, and so on. With the introduction of the dishwasher, there is a reduced need for human dishwashers, but the technology also introduced a whole new industry in its place to support it.

I almost want to say that some law of conservation or even entropy is observed. We are exchanging one kind of burden for another or potentially many.