The things that a lot of these types analyses miss is that while it makes sense to argue that LLMs may enable more overall work by humans, this work exists at a higher difficulty level that many people just aren't able to accomplish.

Here's a specific example: ChatGPT has already started taking away the work of copywriters - there have been a bunch of mainstream media articles about this. I think it's fine to argue "That type of copywriting was low-value work anyway. Now this means that sales and marketing folks will be able to operate at a higher strategic level since they no longer have to deal as much with 'how should this specific blurb on the website be phrased'." The problem with this is 2 fold:

1. A lot of that "low value work" is how new folks learn the tools of the trade to begin with. Over the past 30 or more years technology has done a very good job at "removing" the lower rungs of the career ladder. Remember those stories we used to hear about how folks "worked their way up from the mailroom, or from being a secretary"? The mailroom and secretaries largely don't exist anymore.

2. In my experience and belief, there are a large swath of people that just want to be given instructions and then execute them well and with pride. I think it bodes very, very, very poorly for society if all of those types of jobs go away and the response to those people is basically "fine, you can exist at a level just above starving". We had a booming post WWII middle class because there were tons of these types of good paying factory (and office) jobs that allowed people to have dignity in their work. The destruction of those types of jobs is a huge part of our current social strife and "deaths of dispair" in my opinion.