Will FIRE still make sense in the advent of AGI?

Let me explain. Today most of us are adjusting lifestyles, optimizing savings, all with this end goal of financial independence. In most cases, that goal is at least 5 years+ out.

IF AI continues to advance on its current trajectory, I'm starting to consider that as we chase the AGI singularity we will endure transitory pain. I acknowledge that if we come out on the other side of it there is likely to be abundance, utopia, etc. However, consider what happens between now and then...

As knowledge workers are displaced (~40% of the workforce in the US) and robotics advances (which will then dip into the remaining workforce) it will create a period of transitory pain. It's possible that the government steps in with UBI, we shift from capitalism to something else, tons of scenarios and I'm not pretending to have a crystal ball. What I am doing is controlling what I can control and letting the rest fall into place.

If this many people are displaced, it seems reasonable to consider that consumer costs may drop (due to AI advancement) as will demand (due to lack of supplemental income from knowledge workers losing jobs). If that occurs, those with really any disposable income will be able to not only survive, but thrive financially due to reduced economic equilibriums.

In other words, is it plausible to consider that we are no longer saving for early retirement, but rather saving for weathering displacement? The tactics don't necessarily change, but perhaps the mission does? I suppose indirectly it's still early retirement in the end anyway, but not exactly the way we're all thinking of it IMHO. Even rereading this, this post sounds insane, but the closer I track AI advancement the more I believe this is a very realistic possibility.