When automation took away millions of farming jobs, I think that was good for society and virtually every individual in it.

In aggregate it was good for society, but it was a disaster for a lot of people and a lot of areas. This is the theme of e.g. The Grapes of Wrath.

We should welcome automation and efficiency, but also address the situation of the "losers" of the development and not just expect the invisible hand will sort everything out.

Can you elaborate why having a less diverse farming economy is good for every individual? Automation didn’t invent commodities so it’s unrelated to the advent of a food surplus. It might make obtaining surplus easier but it didn’t give more purpose to people by forcing them to sell their land to a bigger corporation. Even if 50% of farmers don’t want to be farmers anymore doesn’t mean they’d gladly give up their job for a recliner and ubi.

When 80% of Americans were in farming, it's fair to say that it took around 80% of labor to feed America.

If I try to approximate the same today, the median US family can be fed for something around 1/10th of their labor.

That seems like a fantastic improvement, unless you really, really like farming.

when offshoring took millions of factory jobs it was a lot less clear

automation was good for farming, but the consolidation into corporate megafarms probably not so much

I would argue that automating labor isn't bad, but it's being used to take labor away without a solution