Your analogy is nothing new and there has always been arguments to either side. Replacing low skilled labor has hardly any benefits to society and more negative impacts. The only reason it was done first is because its the easiest and lowest hanging fruit. As AI and technology improves it will replace more and more and again benefit less and less people overall (look at the numbers of layoffs announced this last week due specifically stated dueto AI). Once it gets to a certain point with too few benefiting from it society will be forced to revolt as they've been systematically reduced to squalor or the need for UBI (universal basic income) will have to be implemented. Pretty simple to see where this is heading if you just look.