I think what you are missing here is that raising the minimum wage speeds up this process. Say that robots are cheaper than $15/hr employee. If a business can get a $8/hr employee, then they will not buy a robot until it gets much cheaper. On the other hand, if they can no longer get the $8/hr employee, they will buy the robot, which in turn make the robots cheaper through economies of scale, which will further displace additional workers. We are heading towards the guaranteed income economies with the "unemployable" (no skills that can provide a living) class comprising up to 80% of society, however we should not try to hasten the creation of the "unemployables" until the system is in place and can handle the load (i.e. the 20% of people who are willing to learn and work are supporting the remaining 80% who prefer not to produce but instead to pursue hobbies - whether art, gardening, learning for the sake of learning (perpetual students), or on the other end of the spectrum smoking pot and watching TV).
PS> I am not saying that this is bad either - the guaranteed income will enable more people to be creative and take risk, therefore providing higher gains for society as a whole, however there will be problems with the fact that the 20% who work have so much more than the 80% who don't, that it will be perceived as "unfair", even though the 80% will basically be supported by the 20% (akin to kids saying it's so unfair that the parents have money and they don't).