If Gates sees the risks of what’s coming, why doesn’t Congress? The answer is: it does—and that’s exactly why it’s pulling the plug on the safety net.

The public was sold a different story: that immigrants and offshoring destroyed American jobs. That story helped fuel Trump’s rise. But the deeper truth was always this: automation—not immigration—has quietly replaced millions of workers. Even as Trump promised to bring manufacturing home, factories were retooling with machines, not people. Now, AI and humanoid robotics are set to disrupt not just factories, but warehouses, retail, transportation, even eldercare. Some jobs will emerge. Many more will disappear.

And just as this wave crests, the state is retreating from the very programs that people will need to survive it. Not because we can’t afford them—but because the displaced are no longer seen as deserving. A robot tax would require a worldview that values people even when they’re not “productive.” That’s not the worldview driving this budget. What we’re witnessing is a preemptive retreat from responsibility—a government repositioning itself to govern less, punish more, and protect only the profitable.

The robots aren’t coming for your job. They already took it. And the government just told you: you’re on your own.

This is not a new playbook. From the enclosures of early capitalism to the offshoring boom of the 1990s, the pattern has held: privatize the gains, socialize the pain. The only difference now is that the gains are automated—and the pain is being rebranded as deserved.

But pain doesn’t disappear. It becomes political. Displaced workers don’t just vanish—they vote, they protest, they resist. And from the perspective of those in power, they become dangerous. That’s where austerity meets authoritarianism.

The deeper function of this budget isn’t just to shrink the state. It’s to redefine what government is for. Not to care—but to contain. Public goods are stripped away. Surveillance expands. Rights are curtailed. The state steps back from helping the vulnerable—and steps forward to manage them.

This isn’t just a policy shift. It’s a transformation in how value is defined, how power is used, and who gets to belong. We are moving from a moral economy—flawed but still tethered to care—to a market regime where only profit counts. Care work, aging, learning, rest—none of it matters unless it generates revenue. Those who can’t “compete” are no longer treated as citizens. They’re liabilities.

This isn’t a budget. It’s a doctrine. And what it builds is not a stronger society, but a more brittle one—efficient, unequal, and primed for repression.

So here’s the choice. Will automation liberate us—or lock us into deeper hierarchies of exclusion? Gates imagines a society where gains are shared. The House budget imagines one where they’re hoarded—and where those left behind are blamed, not helped.

We can let automation concentrate wealth, deepen inequality, and strip away democracy—or we can fight for a future where people matter more than profit. That choice is still ours—but not for long.

Suggested Readings

Brown, Wendy. Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books, 2015.

Eubanks, Virginia. Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2018.

Ferguson, James. Give a Man a Fish: Reflections on the New Politics of Distribution. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2015.

Graeber, David. Bullshit Jobs: A Theory. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2018.

Harvey, David. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Susskind, Daniel. A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and How We Should Respond. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2020.