Tech & automation is changing the kinds of labor demanded; but it’s not diminishing the demand for labor as such. People who worry about the economic effects of labor-saving technology are falling into the same kind of fallacy as the Luddites hundreds of years ago. The specific errors boil down to: thinking of “jobs” as ends in & of themselves, as if work is performed for its own sake; and thinking as if there is a fixed, finite number of jobs to be done. In truth, work is a means to an end (consumption), & so long as there are human wants & needs as yet unsatisfied (i.e., for the duration of human existence) there is work to be done, jobs to be had.
I don’t have a pessimistic outlook at all (I don’t know what you mean by “capitalistic” outlook; I don’t subscribe to polylogism). I have an educated & realistic outlook. People respond to incentives. When you change the incentive structure, you will affect behavioral outcomes. Obviously not everyone responds the same way. But if you’re gonna try to deny that if everyone is given a guaranteed “basic income” many would respond by working less or perhaps not at all, then you’re engaged in magical thinking & you’re only going to hurt our movement.