So, my opinion is a little more (or less?) nuanced, I think. Basically, a) technological advancements have made and/or are making certain professions obsolete. Court jesters, plague doctors, cavalry, scriveners, switchboard operators, cashiers, there are a lot of occupations that fell by the wayside in history because technology caught up to them. This is very lamentable for individuals affected, but technological advancement isn't going to slow down, and in general made people's lives better. On average, living conditions are better now than they were 100 years ago. I know capitalism isn't fair, and many people are still exploited by the day, but on the whole, quality of life has increased. And b) AI art is not the death knell of artists, because it can not create art intelligently and with understanding as a human can. At least not yet. Case in point, I have tried to get MidJourney to draw me a leaning tower, and a wooden sextant a lot this month, and it seems incapable of drawing either. Had I given this assignment to a human artist, they would have had no problem drawing me what I wanted.
Instead, what AI art is capable of doing, is a) making it possible and affordable for people like me to generate original and appropriate art for at least a number of projects that I would otherwise have just use low quality or poached art for, and b) provide a tool for adapting artists to create proof of concepts, brainstorm ideas, and even draw backgrounds that they can then paint over and perfect to deliver on assignments quicker. Some artists may fall by the wayside, but new ones that are willing to adapt to this new reality will arise, and traditional artists still have plenty of opportunities to nail assignments that the AI is (as of yet) incapable of. The fact that I can now create art with AI without two (or way more) years of practice is irrelevant, both because this advancement in technology can not be undone, and because I actually still can't do the same things an artist with experience can.