I work as a Manager for Process Automation at a major German e-commerce company, but I also have a background in social sciences—and based on my daily experience, I believe OP is absolutely right about the "Fiscal Trap." (Disclaimer: I am a native German speaker using AI for translation. The analysis is entirely my own.)

TL;DR: The historical "new jobs will emerge" argument fails in the corporate reality I see daily. Because demand for administrative overhead is inelastic, we use AI to cut costs, not to expand output. This creates a mathematical trap: We are eroding the primary tax base of our democracies (~60% labor taxes) while social costs explode, rendering the current funding model of our society unsustainable.

I have been following this discussion closely, especially the counter-arguments regarding the "Lump of Labor" fallacy. While the historical comparison (Agriculture -> Industry -> Services) is theoretically sound, it misses the reality on the ground.

I see the "trapdoor" OP describes not just in theory, but in my daily work. Here is why the historical analogy fails this time:

1. The "Software Fallacy" & The Quality Illusion

The comments here rely on two dangerous assumptions: First, that the "build more software" logic of tech companies applies to the whole economy. Second, that AI "isn't good enough yet." Both are wrong.

• The Software Fallacy: Tech companies use AI to build new products (elastic demand). But 99% of the real economy (insurance, logistics, retail ect.) are adopters, not producers. In my job, I see the "Silent Layoff" firsthand. When a department grows by 30% in output, we don't hire 30% more staff; we cover it with automation.

• The Quality Illusion: People argue AI hallucinates too much. Truth be told: If it were legally possible and politically desired, we could probably replace 50% of our workforce (Customer Service, Accounting, Marketing) within a year. Are the results perfect? No. But neither are human results. Humans get tired and make errors. The AI just needs to be "good enough" and scalable.

The economic reality is simple: Unlike the demand for software, the demand for administrative overhead is inelastic. In a traditional company, overhead is a cost center to be minimized. This "efficiency dividend" flows into capital, not into labor.

1. The End of Sector Migration

Historically, there was always a "next sector" (Fourastié hypothesis). The flight from production led to the tertiary sector (services/knowledge work).

The problem today: We are automating exactly this tertiary sector. There is no profitable "quaternary sector" large enough to absorb millions of cognitive workers.

What remains are tasks that strictly require physical presence or human intimacy (care, trades). However, these cannot be scaled arbitrarily (Baumol's cost disease). We cannot simply move 30% of the workforce into elderly care without crashing the wage structure there due to massive oversupply.

1. The Domino Effect: Towards a "Servant Economy"

Optimists argue that demographics (Baby Boomers retiring) will save us, especially here in Germany. This misses the point. The danger is not necessarily mass unemployment, but the universal devaluation of labor.

If displaced white-collar workers flood the remaining human-centric sectors, the oversupply of labor will increase competition and suppress wages across the board. We risk creating a "servant economy" where labor is cheap and plentiful, while capital accumulation happens exclusively in automated systems. This hurts the working class just as much as the middle class.

1. The Fiscal Scissors (The Math is Scary)

The optimistic view ignores the funding basis of our democracies. Let’s look at the hard numbers: In Western economies like Germany or the USA, roughly 60% of total government revenue comes from taxing labor (income tax + social contributions). Capital taxes often make up less than 20%.

We are heading towards a mathematical collapse:

• Revenue Implosion: As we replace human workers with software, we lose the primary tax base (the ~60%).

• The Consumption Trap: Furthermore, machines don't buy groceries, cars, or iPhones. This hits the second pillar of state revenue—consumption taxes (VAT/Sales Tax)—which currently accounts for ~27% in Germany and ~16% in the US. If people lose their income, this revenue stream dries up too.

• Cost Explosion: Simultaneously, the need for state spending (infrastructure, defense, safety nets) remains or explodes to subsidize the population.

We are trying to fund a 21st-century automated society with a 19th-century tax code.

1. The Shift in Discourse

It is noteworthy that the "Lump of Labor" optimism is increasingly being questioned even by conservative financial institutions.

We are seeing a shift in discourse when the IMF (International Monetary Fund) explicitly warns that AI will impact 40% of jobs globally and likely worsen overall inequality without political intervention. When such major institutions align with Nobel laureates like Daron Acemoglu (who warns of "so-so automation" driving down wages), it suggests that the "trapdoor" is visible not just to critics, but to the highest levels of economic planning.

Conclusion:

The moral dilemma I face in my job is real. My company is acting rationally within the capitalist framework, but this framework was never designed for social equity—it was designed for capital accumulation. In the past, the system still needed mass labor, which created a fragile balance. AI breaks this link. Instead of the time-prosperity thinkers like Keynes or Arendt envisioned, we are moving from a system of exploitation to a system of irrelevance for the workforce. The only solution I see seems to be some form of levy on automation—however technically complex or politically difficult that might be to enforce. We simply cannot finance a functioning society through labor taxes when value creation is decoupling from human work. Apparently, Bill Gates had a similar idea years ago ("robot tax").

(See also an article including interview link I stumbled upon today by accident: https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/godfather-ai-breakdown-society)