Realistically the outcome of highly capable advanced AI is an economic dark age more than anything else.
And jobs that require humans’ responsibility.
People can do people stuff, machines can do machine stuff. And market will react accordingly.
Robots automating everything and humans not needing to work was the stuff paradise fantasies were made of.
Sure, it would be the end of capitalism (which, I guess you could describe as "economic dark age"), but people these days have so little imagination what life outside of capitalism looks like that ideal societies sound like a horror story.
Communism was a horror for multiple reasons, but two big ones were: the planners didn't have the data or ability to actually plan (the interactions in a market economy did that much better), and not doing the work you were assigned was a crime (that is, slavery).
AGI and AGLabor solves both these problems. If you don't need workers, you don't need to coerce them into work. And planning and massive data collection (and management in general) sounds like something AGI would work very well at. The conceit that the lower classes are disempowered before the capitalists never struck me as well founded.
If it's you and me, then hey, we can all live happily ever after pursuing hobbies and art, provided for by our mechanical friends, within the limits of resource availability.
If it's an AI trillionaire, things aren't so rosy. If they don't need workers, why would they even bother allocating outputs from the robots to keep us alive?
I don't doubt at all that some group or another will enjoy the fruits of artificial labour. The question is how we are going to get there, and whether that group is most people who are live today and their descendants, or just the families and friends of trillionaires.
I guess one could make the argument that with enough control, a trillionaire could amass a private robot army. But I think regular humans still win (after an epic battle of course).