This is a topic I have been pondering for some years now, and needless to say I could go on for hours about it.
You have addresses this biggest concerns, technology has eliminated jobs, which is usually a good thing, while increasing productivity and sometimes quality as well (but we know that isnt their focus).
This use to mean a family has more time to rest, or work on another project. But with that elimination of a job, a family looses its income since we no longer operate in a self sufficient way. Now that they are out of a job they can no longer afford basic necessitites, even though there is more in supply than before.
So as a society we have created as someone labled it 'fluff' jobs. Most of these are not needed, or wouldnt be if a product was designed to last rather than break.
Also if you look at society, the jobs that are the most crucial to our survival, usually pay the least. (farmers, ranchers, teachers, miners) While jobs that produce no value on their own (Congress, bankers, investors) are paid extremly well. They way I have come to look at it is your productivity is inversily proportional to your pay. And someone else has pointed this out in a questionair he did.
So we are not alone in this though topic. Infact a man named Jacque Fresco spent his entire life thinking about this very subject, knowning that we can only create fluff jobs for so long.
I would incourage everyone, if you havent already, to look into The Venus Project. It proposes a radical change to our society to address this very issue, along with several others.
He has estimated that with current technology, only 10% of the workforce would be needed. This is done by eliminating wasteful jobs, building products to last rather than to sell, and automating what we can, especially everyday repetative task.
With this society we wouldnt need banker, lawyers, manager, or even garbage men. Because for the first few the system they operate on would be osbolete. And for mediocra task like trash collection, this could be automated through technology and a properly designed infastructure. All that would be left are technicians to look over the automated systems, and jobs like teachers, doctors, and engineers that require actual humans. And he suggest that in the future even some of these could be eliminated or reduced.
Now I wont go into any more detail about it since it begins to go off topic, but it is worth a look. And in his own words, it isnt perfect and never will be, but it is better than what we have now. And even if you dont agree with all the changes proposed, we can look at some of the information he puts out.
If we go by his estimation on 10% of the work force needed, we can guess that our currenty system will eventually reach that point. So how do we manage that. Jacque believes that in his system people will volunteer, but in a 'capalist' system who would volunteer to work and spend their time so that others can benifit. Sure there will be a few good doers, but not 10% worth.
So another option I suggest is that everyone still work, just not all the time. instead of working 40hr weeks, work 4 hrs a week, or maybe just be assigned 5 weeks out of the year to work.
Since the cost of living is so high, that wouldnt pay the bills. So we would have to increase pay to match that. And since technology has increased effeciency and productivity there are more than eneough resources to go around for this.
This would free up everyones time to do other enjoyable things, intern leading to an overall happier lifestyle. And who knows, with less time working for money to pay for things like power and morgages, we may see more people becoming self sufficient by planting their own garden, further increasing supply of essential items.
This is one of many solutions that could be proposed to address a major issue that no one wants to address. And the way I look at is is the only jobs that are needed are the ones that actually produce a resource, either raw from the ground, or refined from other raw resources. And thos are the ones that are important.