Bill Gates says teachers, doctors could be replaced by AI in 10 years — how will US workers fare?
In a recent episode of the People by WTF podcast, the Microsoft co-founder laid out a vision of the future in which AI tools take over some of the most essential professions in America, including teaching and medicine.
I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast)
Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how
Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10)
But instead of sounding the alarm, Gates insisted it's a good thing — even as millions of workers brace for change.
"We've always had a shortage of doctors, teachers, of people to work in the factories. Those shortages won't exist," Gates told host Nikhil Kamath. 'AI will come in and provide medical IQ, and there won't be a shortage."
Gates also spoke to The Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon about the transition.
'Will we still need humans?' Fallon asked. 'Not for most things,' Gates replied.
So what are the implications for working Americans?
Gates zeroed in on two industries already under pressure: teaching and health care — markets that have historically suffered labor gaps, especially in rural areas of the U.S.
AI, Gates believes, can fill in the gaps or at least relieve some of the burden.
In schools, AI-powered tutoring tools are already being tested, offering personalized help for students in reading and math, according to Government Technology.
In health care, companies like Suki, Zephyr AI and Tennr can now generate clinical decision support, helping doctors diagnose faster and more accurately, says Business Insider.
'Years from now, AI will have changed things enough that just this pure capitalistic framework probably won't explain much, because as AIs, both as sort of white-collar type work and as blue-collar workers, the robots will get good hands and are able to do the physical things that humans do,' Gates told Kamath. 'We will have created, you know, free intelligence.'
Read more: This hedge fund legend warns US stock market will crash a stunning 80% — claims 'Armageddon' is coming. Don't believe him? He earned 4,144% during COVID. Here's 3 ways to protect yourself
It's not just teachers and doctors. Numerous industries are facing an AI invasion.
Besides some of the other industries that Gates mentions, like construction, cleaning companies and factory workers, the impact has already trickled down to customer service and IT support.
For instance, AI chatbots — with wildly inconsistent success — have already assumed much of the 'first response' nature of product support on the web.
For some, AI may simply become a co-pilot, a helper that boosts productivity. But for others, it could mean full-on job replacement. Gates doesn't deny that. What he argues is that the tradeoff might be worth it.
In Gates' ideal scenario, AI takes over routine tasks and frees people up to pursue more leisure. He envisions a world where the standard 40-hour workweek shrinks and people enjoy better work-life balance. But critics aren't buying the utopia just yet.
A recent United Nations report warned that AI could affect 40% of jobs worldwide, raising concerns about automation and job displacement.
'The benefits of AI-driven automation often favour capital over labour, which could widen inequality and reduce the competitive advantage of low-cost labour in developing economies,' the report said.
So while the industry is expected to reach $4.8 trillion, the UN says the payoff will be 'highly concentrated.'
According to UN Women, there's also the issue of bias and reliability. AI tools have been shown to replicate racial and gender disparities, particularly in hiring and health care decisions — trends that could compound, not solve, existing problems.
Gates isn't alone in predicting AI's rise. But believe it or not, he's one of the few tech leaders still mostly optimistic about it. If his vision holds, workers may need to pivot fast.
That could mean refining skills that complement AI, rather than compete with it. Things like critical thinking, emotional intelligence and creativity are talents that machine thinking may be more likely to struggle with … for now.
It's also a wake-up call for policymakers to think ahead. The transition could be bumpy, but with the right guardrails, it might just lead to a smarter economy.
At least, that's what Gates is betting on.
Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it
Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead
Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you?
This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
7 minutes ago
- CNN
America's tariff-driven buying spree leaves households saddled with debt and vulnerable
Linda Wilburn, a 62-year-old retiree in Susanville, California, did not plan to buy a car this year. She originally wanted to save up, build her credit and buy a used car next year — a necessary purchase, she said. But President Donald Trump's tumultuous trade war drove her to buy a car this past April, fearing higher prices if she waited any longer. Now Wilburn has a $607 monthly car payment coming out of her $1,600 Social Security check, which she said is her only source of income. 'Things are so tight right now,' Wilburn told CNN. 'But the car was a necessity because of my oldest son's medical appointments.' As Trump waged a global trade war this past spring, many Americans raced to make major purchases — cars, electronics and furniture — trying to beat any potential price hikes caused by tariffs. That spending spree has left many with new debt and could weigh on consumer spending, which powers the US economy, in the months ahead. Retail sales surged in March as consumers drove up car sales, spurred on by tariffs targeting imported cars and auto parts, which went into effect in April and May, respectively. But those numbers have weakened since then, according to Commerce Department data, declining 0.9% in May in the steepest monthly decline in two years. Meanwhile, US household debt reached $18.2 trillion in the first three months of the year, a record high on data going back to 2004, as delinquencies marched higher, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. For families like Wilburn's, the spring's spending spree was a gamble against uncertainty —a bet that may now require years of careful budgeting to manage. 'Once I get everything level again, hopefully it will get easier, but I don't know,' Wilburn said. 'Now we can't really do anything for our enjoyment, like buy bird food for all the birds in the backyard.' Americans who are now saddled with new debt may pull back on their purchases. Economists say 'discretionary spending' — purchases that are not necessary for one's survival — is usually first on the chopping block. That includes eating out and traveling for leisure. A Bankrate survey of consumers' plans for discretionary spending showed that 54% of US adults said they expect to spend less on travel, dining out or entertainment this year, up from 49% who said the same last year. In May, retail spending at restaurants and bars fell 0.9%, the Commerce Department said, the first monthly decline since February and the steepest one since February 2023. Annika Wheelock, 28, and her family used a loan and a home equity line of credit to accelerate spending on more than $137,000 in purchases — including a new car, computers, a refrigerator and home repairs – to avoid any sticker shock from Trump's tariffs. With her husband returning to school this fall and their retirement contributions slashed, Wheelock, who works as a nurse, says her family is now living paycheck to paycheck. 'After making all these purchases, we're hunkering down and not planning on spending that much money, like we're not planning on going out and putting money back into the economy anytime soon,' she said. In March, a CreditKarma survey of more than 2,000 US adults showed that 51% of them said they changed their spending behavior in anticipation of Trump's tariffs, with 18% specifically saying the pulled forward major purchases. Trump's tariffs are widely expected to eventually weigh on Americans through higher inflation, even those who front-loaded their big-ticket purchases. That means consumers who took part in the spring spending spree are left even more financially vulnerable. Henry Tuason, a 52-year-old school photographer from Los Angeles, said he spent nearly $50,000 earlier this year on a new laptop, television and a $45,000 Hyundai Tucson Hybrid to get ahead of the tariffs' impact. He said he's been on edge these days, worried his family could suddenly deal with an unexpected hardship. 'One day, when I went to go pick (my wife) up from work, people were driving very badly and I told her how picking her up is stressing me out because of this brand new car,' he said. 'She's gone back to taking the bus because to crash it prematurely would be very bad.' And it's not just being prepared for emergencies. If more Americans find themselves without a job or dealing with any financial hardship, that would further trigger a pullback in spending. 'Anytime you lose a job is bad, but it'd be much worse if me or my wife did nowadays, after everything we bought,' Tuason said. The unemployment rate remains at a low 4.2% for the third consecutive month in a row and employers are still demonstrating an appetite to hire. On Tuesday, the Labor Department reported that job openings unexpectedly rose in May to 7.7 million. However, entry-level hiring is down and Trump's chaotic trade war paralyzed some business decision-making. For now, Wall Street and economic policymakers are watching closely whether spending plummets after households stretched themselves to beat Trump's tariffs. 'As the tariffs kick in with price increases finally taking effect, that will be a hit to people's real income, their purchasing power, and because of that, you will see a slowing in consumer spending,' Jay Bryson, Wells Fargo's chief economist, told CNN. 'And that will also be because of that pull-forward in spending.'
Fox News
19 minutes ago
- Fox News
Politicians push job-killing minimum wage hikes while ignoring the devastating economic reality
Despite it being widely known by anyone who can think two steps ahead that price controls have negative consequences, politicians can't help but continue to promote price controls as policy. With Americans facing increased costs of living, there has been a return to calling for minimum wage hikes from democratic socialists like New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, who wants to raise the minimum wage in the city to $30/hour, to Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who is bafflingly pushing an increase in the federal minimum wage to $15/hour with additional increases indexed to inflation. If wages could be raised by mandate without negative consequences, why would we stop there? Why not make the minimum wage $100/hour, $100,000/hour or even a cool $1 million/hour? Because in real life, that's not the way things work. The minimum wage has always been an evil policy, rooted in racism. It was passed as legislation precisely to exclude unskilled workers, particularly immigrants, minorities and women, from the workforce. It has the same effect today. But the financially illiterate don't seem to understand basic economics. The minimum wage is not an average wage, median wage, maximum wage or even an expected wage. It is quite literally a floor (although, as economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, the real minimum wage is zero). As reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics ("BLS") via FRED, only 1% of workers report being paid at or below the federal minimum wage, and that data is "based solely on the hourly wage they report (which does not include overtime pay, tips or commissions)." The minimum wage is heavily slanted toward teens and workers entering the workforce with few skills. As the BLS noted, "Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they accounted for 43% of those paid the federal minimum wage or less." While minimum wage directly impacts a small number of individuals, its effects ripple throughout the economy at large. If teens and unskilled workers have a guaranteed wage floor, those with skills and experience will want to be compensated even more. That increases both wages and taxes paid for a business throughout their labor force, as well as that of all their suppliers, adding substantially to operating costs and reducing what may already be slim operating margins. The businesses will either have to make less money or pass on costs to consumers – or both. This makes products and services more expensive and, in many cases, will put businesses out of business across the economy as every company now competes in a market where nonskilled workers have a high fixed cost set by government. Sometimes, businesses will also reduce product sizes or service offerings – shrinkflation, as we saw under the last administration – but one way or another, that increase in labor cost flows through the economy and impacts what you are able to get for your dollars. It's notable that small business owners, who often work well in excess of 40 hours of week and risk their own capital, don't get a guaranteed wage, but politicians are happy to make entrepreneurial efforts more risky and costly. The minimum wage, particularly the federal proposals, don't take into account different economic costs by region or geographic area, either. Just because bad policy exists doesn't mean that we should keep doubling down on it. Pay should be negotiated between parties based on value and demand for skills and services. An economy cannot function without being able to get people into the workforce and trained. We need to keep jobs where people can enter the workforce, learn skills and, if desired, move on in their career paths. At a time when AI is threatening jobs, and technology is replacing workers, enacting legislation that incentivizes fewer jobs and makes it more costly and difficult to run a business is patently insane. Wages will naturally shift with the market for labor, as we have seen in recent years. Politicians who are trying to "help" will once again find that intentions do not equate to outcomes, and their policies only make the cost-of-living issues worse. If they want to help in a way that drives positive outcomes, make it cheaper and easier to do business by removing costly regulatory barriers and red tape. That is the path to a flourishing economy and better cost of living, not mandated wages.
Bloomberg
26 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Today's Housing Math Favors Buying — Even in Austin
With mortgage rates still near 7%, even relatively wealthy households are choosing to rent rather than buy, and it's easy to understand why. The combination of high home prices and elevated mortgage rates has hit affordability hard, and inventories are mounting. In the quarters ahead, it's entirely possible for national home prices to experience modest year-over-year price declines. Sun Belt states may be susceptible to even more jarring re-pricings. Does this portend a sea change in Americans' housing preferences or an all-out crash in prices? I highly doubt it. Even if that were remotely true, timing the market is hard and potentially pointless, unless you have the option to live rent-free in your parents' guest house while you wait. What truly matters is whether home prices stay on an upward trajectory over the medium- and long-term. Provided real estate follows its usual pattern and appreciates in value over time, buying may still deliver the best financial outcomes. And despite all the handwringing, there's a reasonably strong expert consensus that prices will continue to do just that.
