Bill Gates: Tax Robots

But robots aren't paid. I thought was the point of having robots.

 

Without reading in to what Gates had to say, robots, and automating tools, are already taxed.

For example: nail guns certainly take jobs away from laborers who use a hammer to drive nails, as nail guns are far more productive and precise in their driving of a nail. However, nail guns are taxed at the point of sale like any other good, and when a nail gun needs to be serviced, that service too can be taxed just as a good can be taxed. Also, when the operator of a nail gun provides a service for their client, that service, which uses the nail gun, can be taxed.

I think it would be a silly idea to place further taxes on nail guns. So what if they "steal" human jobs?

 

I'm assuming he means sales tax in automation should be taxed at income tax/payroll tax rates or at least not be tax deductible.

Sounds like he's just trying to make people think than a serious proposal.

 

What an idiotic idea. Only a moron would think this is a great idea. Its not like there are androids walking around doing the work of humans.

Its called automation. Its been around since the beginning of time. A horse pulling a cart of goods (we should tax that 50x since it would take 50 people to do the same job) is no different than a machine manufacturing chips and electronics.

 

But Bill Gates isn't a moron, so maybe there is something worth exploring there.

 

Some people in this forum think of themselves as the love child of Einstein and Edison.

 

by this logic we should tax Excel for all the workers spreadsheets displaced

 

We should just tax Excel to the point that people find something else, something better.

 

nail guns are tools that humans use to increase productivity for their job, in this case construction....robots nowadays are COMPLETELY removing jobs, especially in manufacturing (where most of the products are the same), unlike construction, an industry that hasn't fully seen robots almost completely take over, due to architecture/construction techniques...i think if a robot completely removes a job, a tax could be a good idea...maybe a tax on all company owned robots/automation assets if they're too efficient, not sure, the complications arise when we try to determine what is TOO efficient

 

If they need tax incomes from Robots, they should move to VAT.

 

Truth. By all means, if anonymous poster "SpaceGhost" wants to shout down Bill Gates on an idea relating technology and economics, we should side with "SpaceGhost."

But anyway, y'all, an Alternative Mechancial Tax, amiright? LOL.

 

Well that is the point from the view of the individual capitalist or enterprise to maximum THEIR profits.. Now if you have the slightest interest in not having the say .0001% who own/control the robots have all the money it is an issue.

Tax the productivity of the robot ala Gates (who you should not assume is some big humanitarian in his primary focus) or tax to provide a guaranteed income.

 

They intersect with "libertarians" who aren't concerned with inequality type issues since they always assume they will be the winners or are even deluded enough that they have bought the ultimate .0001% meme that "taxes are theft or slavery" lol.

 

Wouldn't the actual solution be to go to a full Value Added Tax system. That way it doesn't matter if the work was done by a robot or a human, the value added is taxed.

 

The left has this insane idea to tax tax tax tax tax. If you throw in an automation tax, business will just leave the country.

These "robots" do not use tax dollars. They do not require healthcare. They do not require government services. They do not use public utilities. They are a company asset and are treated as such.

 

But they are causing more people to fall behind which is causing more social spending. I don't know if "taxing robots" is the solution but you keep focusing on capital instead of labor you'll still lose those jobs and you'll continue with rising inequality.