I think there is a much easier answer to this and that is a basic income.
How is basic income better than the current system? Note that unemployed people get money today, at least in (most of?) Europe.
That's the unemployment benefit but if / after you're not entitled to that, you get different benefits. In Germany it's 382 EUR + housing and healthcare expenses according to wiki.
Just try to contemplate this question: what would a society, an economy look like if everyone was provided with everything for their basic needs, like a house or a flat, food and an "allowance" to participate in social activity, people could still be able to choose to work if they wanted to, but not working would not be frowned upon? How would this society develop, what would people do because they can do what they please all day, what would the influence on society's creativity and inventiveness be?
"Basic income would negatively affect our current economic system" is not the right answer to that question. Automation will not become less, full employment will be less and less feasible, so answering these questions will be inevitable.
1) With full automation, scarcity is pushed down, availability up, cost down, so price necessarily is pushed down.
2) Companies have a tendency of trying to avoid killing the golden eggs goose, and decreasing prices by higher availability is usually frowned upon by the people making the money, understandably so, I might add. It's perfectly rational, it just sucks for everyone else. Just look at the history of the music, books and movie/TV entertainment industries.
3) The road from "here" to "there" is going to be necessarily tumultuous, no matter what, precisely because of 2). I'm sure we'll get that omelette, but eggs on every side will be broken.
4) There is a sizable percent of the population (let's say 10%, pulling it from my backside) that have not found any artistic, professional or personal aspirations, regardless of social class. It might sound like I'm dissing "those" people, but I'm not. People are wired differently, and just in the same way a Linux user doesn't understand why somebody would be a VB.Net developer, or a programmer why anyone would be a lawyer, that doesn't mean those people are lesser in any way, they just have different interests and motivations. The increase in "leisure time" should be accompanied by an increase in availability and promotion of "entertainment" (I believe "pursuits" would be a better word) of many different kinds, to have a higher chance of people actually finding what does drive them.
1. Basic income. Redistribute wealth, since enough wealth
is produced, it just isn't available to everyone.
2. Force everyone to work less (for more money). If you
lower the maximum number number of hours people are
allowed to work, more people will need to be employed to
do the same amount of work. You would probably need to
accompany this by an increase in minimum wage.
3. We could all do more. Government could take a more
active roll in back-filling demand. If we decided to
employ a million more doctors, or revamp the entire
power grid, or build a Moon base, or colonize Mars, or
move Mars into orbit around Venus, or accelerate Venus's
rotation to support colonization, we could easily
achieve full employment.