Even in the absence of utopia or doom, it is questionable whether your retirement savings will have any value by mid-century. Because you don't need either to bring down our current socioeconomic system.
There are various scenarios that will cause some sort of massive disruption, such as rogue actors using advanced AI to develop bioweapons. And even if only 30% of jobs are lost. What happens then? Who will pay the taxes? You don't need artificial general intelligence for this to happen.
The bulk of the taxes shouldn't come from labour, it should come from profits. Those who make the profits will pay the taxes, whether they use AI or robots or human labour.
In the context of the AI explosion, we're wasting our time discussing about the inherent threats of AGI, when there's no meaningful discussion to be had other than on the ways to make our society robust, if not invulnerable to the threats - regulation and control to remove vulnerabilities, and most notably UBI to prevent societal collapse.
AGI will not order killer nanobots if no well-regulated industry will provide killer nanobots to random consumers. AGI won't spread disinformation if no human operator will dare to use it in such a way, for fear of criminal charges. AGI won't make artists or professionals starve, if those people won't have to rely on monetising their art or cognitive skills in order to pay their bills. We need to fix our real problems, they're long overdue, and the spectre of AGI only gives us the much-needed sense of urgency.