The best answer I've had wouldn't work without a big change in politics: we could use a ton of home health aides and other support for aging Boomers, not to mention classroom assistants (one of the best ways to boost academic performance) or daycare workers.
Spending on directly helping people seems like a very humane way to deal with shifts in employment but I don't see us choosing to invest that kind of money, not to mention the problem with attitudes complicating shifting a heavily-male worker surplus into traditionally female fields.
Exactly the problem – it'd be a good way to deal with a rising worker surplus, just as e.g. the New Deal created a lot of not-strictly-necessary public works, but I don't know how we get here in the current political climate and its bitter crab-pot mentality.
Spending on directly helping people seems like a very humane way to deal with shifts in employment but I don't see us choosing to invest that kind of money, not to mention the problem with attitudes complicating shifting a heavily-male worker surplus into traditionally female fields.