3) AI is not itself creative or productive without a human in the loop. If the job can be entirely done by AI, rather than the AI just being a tool to speed up a human's work, the job is a waste of time, does not need to be done, and a competent manager should eliminate that job.
Ok, I'll bite.
1) This is an oversimplification. Bullshit jobs arise for a variety of reasons. Some will be retained, some will be automated away.
2) AI will lead to a variety of new BS jobs.
3) If the job can be done with current AI, it didn't need to be done and is BS.
A good test of whether people actually believe specific academic theories is if they use them to argue against other fashionable ideas when they conflict, even if the new position's lower status. Anyone who believes Graeber's Bullshit Jobs argument should also be pretty vocal right now that companies will not be at all interested in replacing workers with AI.
I never understood when adults couldn’t figure out the correct name for characters on kids shows, but @DRG_physics reaction to referring incorrectly to one of the Octonauts as ‘professor tentacles’ is why I’ve committed to the bit.