Yeah it's a bit of a dilemma. On the one hand, it's probably not ethically all that great that humans practice intense eugenics creating non-natural dogs for work and companionship. That said, they did, and the dogs exist. I suppose I could buy an argument that we need to phase out breeding and domestic pet ownership on a moral level along the lines of the moral argument against breeding and killing livestock, etc, but until that day, there is a net ethical good in responsible pet ownership.

For my personal example, I have a Dutch Shepherd from a police line of dogs (dutch KNPV). She did not have the maximum desirable traits that the breeder looks for, so he didn't want to breed her, and would have likely sent her to central america for "executive protection" duty, ie guarding some rich asshole or cartel boss or whatever. Instead, we got her, and she gets lots of scratching, delicious food and gets to chase squirrels and guard her den (our home). It's not a horrible outcome for her, and certainly is a great outcome for us--she gives us lots of love and companionship.

re: dogs working, it's another tricky concept. If the working involves what would be abuse, I'd completely agree. For some dogs, like mine, that have been generationally selected to have high drive, they are actually much happier and more content if they have "jobs". In our case, since we're not professional dog handlers, her jobs are silly things around the house, like holding on her place mat, or fetching things, or "helping" me with the compost. But working dogs get a lot of satisfaction out of using their noses, and other abilities, in concert with a handler to do stuff.

If the pet is vegan, not in a cage, not from a breeder and basically stays just because they like their human that's pretty good I guess, but I don't think that's the bulk of pets. I sounds like your dog had a great life