I disagree with the premise that there is a limited quantity of stuff required for me to be happy. This is on the basis that someone must decide when I have enough stuff.
Our economy exists because of the creation of labor-saving devices. Imagine, if you would, a world where everyone decided that wood-fired stoves and ovens were good enough. The amount of time you have to spend maintaining the fire and heating the stove makes any attempts at cooking prohibitively time-consuming. Imagine coming home and spending 45 minutes boiling water for Ramen on your stove. My point is that, while advances in production may result in lost jobs, they usually increase our standard of living as a country.
The GP really did make an eloquent point about how the automated CNC machine improved his worker's standard of living by moving their hands away from the really dirty part of the equipment. In the company that I work for, we produce all of our walls for houses using a gantry. The facility produces almost half a mile of wall every day. That's walls for 20 or 30 houses a day. This can be accomplished with 15 people. This has halved the number of people neccessary to actually assemble a house, meaning that where before crews were 3-5 people now they are two people and productivity has increased. This means that we can sell more houses, meaning everyone gets paid more, and our standard of living increases.
Unfortunately if all you've ever done is flip burgers and someone creates a burger-flipping machine, you'd better learn how to operate the machine or you'll be out of a job. As a collection of individuals, our society needs to learn to adapt to changes in job availability because everyone's job is replaceable with technology.