The REAL Fight Over AI Art

Even trying my best to look at the points made with open eyes, I still don't like the prospect of AI art.

As far as I understand, AI art is limited by the source images used to train it. To meaningfully increase the variety of art styles requires new non-AI assisted art. But who will bother learning the old methods when AI assisted art is so much easier to do? People already get told to "learn a proper job", now there will also be "why are you bothering to do it the old way if the AI does a better job as you anyway". It's incredibly discouraging. And yes, there are a lot of things that the AI will be better at than artists, especially than beginners, but there are also many downsides to it. 
For example, there is already an inherit feeling of "similarity" to AI art which I feel will only further contribute to making our art more homogenous. 
And a large part of the beauty and expressiveness of art lies in it's variety. The last decade already felt like lots of stuff was just being regurgitated (e.g.: movie remakes/ infinite sequels... or influencers copying formulas due to the pressure of social media algorithms) and AI art will only advance this process further in its own way.

Yes, we've had technological advances before and many of them even put people out of a job, but these advances usually don't sabotage the learning path itself, at least not in the creative industry. Advances often removed the menial/boring parts of a job but the artist typically retains the creative decision making. (e.g.: physically cutting film strips is no longer necessary, but it's still a human that decides where to "cut".)
AI art generation changes that... It takes over the decision part of the task, which can easily lead to  lazy decision making.
And then there is also the aspect of the abundance of something lowering the appreciation for it.

To me it feels like it's one step forward that will soon force us to backwards by multiple steps or at the very least hinder our ability to advance further.