Robot Payroll Taxes

[Ben]

So Bill Gates wants robots to pay taxes, same as the human workers they replace. Interesting premise. The closest analog for me is Internet sales taxes. More and more states are forcing the collection of state sales taxes for interstate sales.

Certainly there will be a hit to federal and state taxe revenue as businesses shift more and more to robots. I'm actually wondering if they'll put up much of a fight on this, since in many cases (e.g., fast food) a single kiosk or robot can probably replace five people, so those businesses might not mind their robot workers being taxed, since the tax the business would now pay (versus the organic workers paying them) are probably a good deal less than benefits, insurance, etc.

[HankB]

When they become obsolete, will the robots become eligible for Robot Medicare and Social Security?

[KD5NRH]

So Bill Gates wants robots to pay taxes, same as the human workers they replace.

Define "robot."  What about the spreadsheets that replace millions of people doing math with pencil and paper nationwide?  The oven timers that replace servants to get dinner out before it burns?  The 1929 Allis Chalmers tractor that eliminates 2-3 mule handlers?

[K Frame]

Bill Gates needs to get bitten by a malarial mosquito.

What an idiot.

[French G.]

You mean the robot the company is taxed on buying, carried as an asset on the balance sheet and makes money that the company pays taxes on? Yeah, sounds legit. How about lower the corporate tax rate, institute the Fair tax and watch revenues, economic growth, and people's real income explode?

[Ben]

Bill Gates needs to get bitten by a malarial mosquito.

What an idiot.

Apparently he's going off an EU model that still hasn't passed over there.

Ironically, how many jobs did Gates "destroy" with technology?

[charby]

I kind of see where this might be going.

As more and more robots replace human workers, opportunities for income will decrease. Something needs to offset that income opportunity that people were earning. Really not that far off, thinking from human existence on this planet, from robots being able to repair robots, food being created from nutrients in a mechanized lab. Not everyone can be a robot engineer, so where are the income opportunities for people. Are we going to have to come up with some sort of government provided income from taxation of work from robots? Do we have extreme global birth control to reduce the population, lottery for opportunity to produce offspring?

At one time agriculture was the main living of most people (there were labor intensive trade too and office type jobs), as that became more mechanized people off set by reduction went into manufacturing, manufacturing reduces and people move into more service type jobs, so as service jobs are replaced by robots, what it the next job going to be?

[MechAg94]

Apparently he's going off an EU model that still hasn't passed over there.

Ironically, how many jobs did Gates "destroy" with technology?

This is Windows we are talking about right?  Any reduction was offset by the IT maintenance personnel hired. 

I really doubt he destroyed any.  With better data capability, we just use and demand more data. 

The bigger question is how much productivity did MS destroy when they decided to scramble the user interface and drop down menus for Excel. 

[KD5NRH]

Are we going to have to come up with some sort of government provided income from taxation of work from robots?

Nah; just put the dumb ones to work harvesting veggies to be sold to dumber ones as "untouched by teh evil robotz."

[cordex]

Are we going to have to come up with some sort of government provided income from taxation of work from robots?

1. The government taxes companies who use robotic production
2. The government gives a portion of that tax money to folks who no longer work
3. Those folks buy the products produced by the taxed companies  

In essence, companies would be funding the purchase of their own products through taxes?  Assuming no waste or inefficiency, does the math work out?

At one time agriculture was the main living of most people (there were labor intensive trade too and office type jobs), as that became more mechanized people off set by reduction went into manufacturing, manufacturing reduces and people move into more service type jobs, so as service jobs are replaced by robots, what it the next job going to be?

I don't know what their next job is going to be.  Then again, as you point out this isn't the first time that jobs or even job sectors have been gutted, replaced or outright eliminated.  If you told someone in 1800 that over the next two hundred years 97% of the agricultural jobs would disappear to say nothing of the massive impact on blacksmithing, chimney sweeps,  buggy driving, horse training, cloth weaving jobs, (and most other jobs of the day) they might have been forgiven for assuming that no jobs would exist to replace them.  They could never have foreseen jobs as laser eye surgeon, database engineer, iPhone repairman, gasoline delivery driver, or YouTube content creator. 

If 200 years ago our ancestors had tried to replace the theoretical income lost by the impact of technology with taxes and birth control instead of allowing businesses and workforce to adapt and evolve to use growing technology, would we be better or worse off than we are today?

[charby]

1. The government taxes companies who use robotic production
2. The government gives a portion of that tax money to folks who no longer work
3. Those folks buy the products produced by the taxed companies  

In essence, companies would be funding the purchase of their own products through taxes?  Assuming no waste or inefficiency, does the math work out?

It's not an apples to apples comparison. Depending upon what level of taxation and government payout given (and number of people receiving) and standard of living at the time it could work, but you'd have to toss out capitalism as we know it.

I don't know what their next job is going to be.  Then again, as you point out this isn't the first time that jobs or even job sectors have been gutted, replaced or outright eliminated.  If you told someone in 1800 that over the next two hundred years 97% of the agricultural jobs would disappear to say nothing of the massive impact on blacksmithing, chimney sweeps,  buggy driving, horse training, cloth weaving jobs, (and most other jobs of the day) they might have been forgiven for assuming that no jobs would exist to replace them.  They could never have foreseen jobs as laser eye surgeon, database engineer, iPhone repairman, gasoline delivery driver, or YouTube content creator. 

If 200 years ago our ancestors had tried to replace the theoretical income lost by the impact of technology with taxes and birth control instead of allowing businesses and workforce to adapt and evolve to use growing technology, would we be better or worse off than we are today?

True, but before 1600/1700 we has centuries of agriculture and hard manual labor, the last 200 or even 100 years has been rapid changes in technology. We can see it more so than say someone from 1800. Just think about how much technology has replaced people in our short lives, look at how wages have stagnated for many, even from the beginning of globalization of manufacturing in the 70's. Now we are talking about replacing a lot of jobs with robots, even in the service industries, like food preparation in restaurants and cleaning of motel rooms, lawncare, etc.

[K Frame]

"As more and more robots replace human workers, opportunities for income will decrease."

And if history is any indication, other activities will spring up to fill the gaps created by automation. Some of the new jobs are good, some are not so good.

This cycle has been going on since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Over the short term it can be disruptive as hell, and can be associated with quite a bit of violence (think introduction of power looms in British and even American textile factories)...

Weavers and spinners were replaced by power, leading to displacement of workers (Luddite revolts in the 1810s in Britain), but over time the total number of jobs in the mills skyrocketed because the looms brought the price of cloth down, opening up vast markets both at home and abroad. It also greatly increased the number of jobs in associated industries (think shipping and dock workers required to handle the raw materials being shipped into Britain).

On the negative side, power looms, the cotton gin, and the increased demand for American cotton propped up the Southern slave economy, which had been slowly collapsing under its own weight) and made it immensely profitable, which contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War.

It's all a rich tapestry...

[just Warren]

The 1929 Allis Chalmers tractor that eliminates 2-3 mule handlers?

Where muh mule handlers?

[charby]

Where muh mule handlers?

Setting check wires for the 2 row planter.

[charby]

"As more and more robots replace human workers, opportunities for income will decrease."

And if history is any indication, other activities will spring up to fill the gaps created by automation. Some of the new jobs are good, some are not so good.

This cycle has been going on since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Over the short term it can be disruptive as hell, and can be associated with quite a bit of violence (think introduction of power looms in British and even American textile factories)...

Weavers and spinners were replaced by power, leading to displacement of workers (Luddite revolts in the 1810s in Britain), but over time the total number of jobs in the mills skyrocketed because the looms brought the price of cloth down, opening up vast markets both at home and abroad. It also greatly increased the number of jobs in associated industries (think shipping and dock workers required to handle the raw materials being shipped into Britain).

On the negative side, power looms, the cotton gin, and the increased demand for American cotton propped up the Southern slave economy, which had been slowly collapsing under its own weight) and made it immensely profitable, which contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War.

It's all a rich tapestry...

Nice pun.

Now what would be some examples of futuristic careers when most labor and repetitive jobs are replaced by robots.

[Ben]

Nice pun.

Now what would be some examples of futuristic careers when most labor and repetitive jobs are replaced by robots.

[charby]

Someone needs to hunt the criminals.

[Nick1911]

Taxing robots strikes me as a very luddite way to resist the march of technology.  Placing the burden of work on machines instead of people is a feature, not a bug.

Society has managed to come out just fine (and ahead!) in all the previous upsets disruptive technologies have brought with them - I expect it will continue to do the same.

[just Warren]

If this roboticizing of work lowers the costs for factors of production we'll see entrepreneurs using these now lower cost factors to do things that are currently too expensive to do.

Don't know what those are yet, but along with weird little niches whole new areas of growth will open up.

I also think that as automation/robotization continues increasing that's going to mean more and more coders and so forth will be needed. Like well beyond what we have now, and that alone will absorb a huge percentage of those that might be displaced. That is kids coming up, maybe not so much older workers; but maybe some of them too.

[just Warren]

I want to believe that the gun he's holding doesn't use normal ammunition, instead it shoots out clones of his mustache and anything a mustache hits is instantly under his control.

[Marnoot]

The magazine well looking thing forward of the trigger is just about the right size to hold a stack of 'stashes.

[KD5NRH]

And if history is any indication, other activities will spring up to fill the gaps created by automation. Some of the new jobs are good, some are not so good.

How many modern artistic endeavors are really only possible because the people doing them aren't needed in the fields?

How many corner bookstores - or for that matter, public libraries - predate movable type?  How many orders of magnitude did their numbers increase with each advance in mechanized printing and paper manufacture until a typical book cost less than an hour's skilled labor?

[cordex]

It's not an apples to apples comparison. Depending upon what level of taxation and government payout given (and number of people receiving) and standard of living at the time it could work, but you'd have to toss out capitalism as we know it.

Interesting theory.

True, but before 1600/1700 we has centuries of agriculture and hard manual labor, the last 200 or even 100 years has been rapid changes in technology. We can see it more so than say someone from 1800. Just think about how much technology has replaced people in our short lives, look at how wages have stagnated for many, even from the beginning of globalization of manufacturing in the 70's. Now we are talking about replacing a lot of jobs with robots, even in the service industries, like food preparation in restaurants and cleaning of motel rooms, lawncare, etc.

Given the multitude of technological improvements, decreased cost and increased availability (as well as outright creation!) of both staples and luxuries, safer working conditions, etc. weighed honestly against perceived stagnating wages and lost/reduced sectors of employment, do you believe people on average are commercially worse off today versus at any arbitrary point in history?  As an addendum, if you do believe that there was a historical golden age in which people were better off than today, were the adverse changes due to increases in technology or increases in governmental interference?

I would argue that whenever there is technological upheaval in a relatively free market some individuals will suffer in the short run and society overall benefits.  Artificially holding back and discouraging technological development does nothing to improve conditions except for select special interests.

Now what would be some examples of futuristic careers when most labor and repetitive jobs are replaced by robots.

Don't confuse an individual's lack of prescience with the inability of society to cope with technological change.  Just because someone in 1950 would have been unlikely to predict the commercial implications of e-commerce, smartphones and automatic car washes doesn't mean that society hasn't incorporated those technologies to great benefit.  Even in 1990 very few people could have foreseen careers that would exist twenty years later.

[charby]

Interesting theory.
Given the multitude of technological improvements, decreased cost and increased availability (as well as outright creation!) of both staples and luxuries, safer working conditions, etc. weighed honestly against perceived stagnating wages and lost/reduced sectors of employment, do you believe people on average are commercially worse off today versus at any arbitrary point in history?  As an addendum, if you do believe that there was a historical golden age in which people were better off than today, were the adverse changes due to increases in technology or increases in governmental interference?

I think our golden age for individual economic success was post WWII-1970. For the most part most people with a high school education (and a decent worth ethic) you could land a job that in a few years supported a single income middle class household.

Health wise we are better off today then during that period, but there are skeptics of modern medicine that would love to bring us back before all the advances in medicine.

Also it appears that being an entrepreneur from a rags to riches is harder now a days then in the past, or at least there is fewer opportunities. Sometimes due to regulations, market is already cornered by a much bigger player or people just won't pay a price for a good or service that can create a livable profit for the entrepreneur. Someone is already doing it cheaper, faster or in volume with low wage employees.

This is a segway, but is the movement to strip benefits and reduce wages from public sector employees a start to emulate that in the private sector, basically remove competition of losing employees for something slightly better in benefits or even wages? We know many technology companies use imported skilled workers because they will work under market value, is lower wages and reduced standard of living going to be the new thing for everyone who isn't in the wealthy class? Is this going to a repeat of the late 1800s-early 1900s where labor is basically exploited with a meager salary where the captains of industry explode their wealth. Robots going to be the "exploited ones" and most of society become peasants?

[mtnbkr]

This is a segway

No, this is a Segway:


I think you mean segue

Chris