> Compare the total number of, say, cashiers to software developers.

So, ATMS... would you replace them with human bank tellers? Would that be a net benefit to the economy?

No, I mean, if it is indeed the case that the total number of jobs displaced by automation exceeds those generated by it, I have no particular take on how to handle it.

My point is that though automation "costs" jobs, it simultaneously reduces the cost of production (e.g. the production of financial transactions, here). Ultimately the benefit from more efficient production is a rising tide that lifts all ships. It would be hard to argue that reversing the industrial revolution and returning to cottage industries would be a net benefit, even though our current production levels would require 10-1000x as many jobs.