[kictanet] Why Bill Gates would tax robots

Tue Feb 28 09:54:47 EAT 2017

Hi Job,

No one starts a business to pay salaries and taxes this is the kind of
thinking we must reverse. You cannot punish innovativeness. I am of
the opinion that there is enough work for every human being, it is
just that we have become choosy and no one wants to do the dirty jobs.
I still dont get the point of taxing my combine harvester which has
its own maintenance cost on which i pay taxes.

Regards

On 2/28/17, Job Muriuki <muriukin at gmail.com> wrote:
> Robots deny human's ( not owner) revenue and by extension, the government
> loses out too and the main beneficiary is the business owner. It only makes
> sense to tax the use of robots and use the cash to support the welfare of
> the citizens.
> What do we expect the guys who are replaced to do for a living?
>
> Regards,
> Job Muriuki,
>
> Skype: heviejob
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Barrack Otieno via kictanet <
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>
>> Hi Wangari,
>>
>> When you buy a hoe you pay VAT, i guess the same applies to a Robot
>> which is a piece of equipment, ROBOTS cannot pay PAYE, they don't earn
>> a living
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On 2/27/17, WANGARI KABIRU via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
>> wrote:
>> > Read on...
>> > Robots are taking human jobs, so should they pay up for what the
>> > human(s)
>> > would have?
>> >
>> > Blessed day.
>> > Regards/Wangari ---
>> > Pray God Bless. 2013Wangari circa - "Being of the Light, We are
>> > Restored
>> > Through Faith in Mind, Body and Spirit; We Manifest The Kingdom of God
>> > on
>> > Earth".
>> >
>> >
>> >  The robot that takes your job should pay taxes, says Bill Gates
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > |
>> > |
>> > |
>> > |   |    |
>> >
>> >    |
>> >
>> >   |
>> > |
>> > |   |
>> > The robot that takes your job should pay taxes, says Bill Gates
>> >  By Kevin J. Delaney The world's richest man is arguing for taxing and
>> > slowing automation.  |   |
>> >
>> >   |
>> >
>> >   |
>> >
>> >
>> >  DROID DUTIES
>> > The robot that takes your job should pay taxes, says Bill Gates
>> >
>> > Why Bill Gates would tax robots
>> > Quartz VideoWhy Bill Gates would tax robots0:001:40
>> > Share
>> >
>> > Written by
>> >  Kevin J. Delaney
>> > Obsession
>> >  Machines with Brains February 17, 2017     Robots are taking human
>> > jobs.
>> > But Bill Gates believes that governments should tax companies’ use of
>> them,
>> > as a way to at least temporarily slow the spread of automation and to
>> fund
>> > other types of employment.It’s a striking position from the world’s
>> richest
>> > man and a self-described techno-optimist who co-founded Microsoft, one
>> > of
>> > the leading players in artificial-intelligence technology.In a recent
>> > interview with Quartz, Gates said that a robot tax could finance jobs
>> taking
>> > care of elderly people or working with kids in schools, for which needs
>> are
>> > unmet and to which humans are particularly well suited. He argues that
>> > governments must oversee such programs rather than relying on
>> businesses, in
>> > order to redirect the jobs to help people with lower incomes. The idea
>> > is
>> > not totally theoretical: EU lawmakers considered a proposal to tax
>> > robot
>> > owners to pay for training for workers who lose their jobs, though on
>> Feb.
>> > 16 the legislators ultimately rejected it.“You ought to be willing to
>> raise
>> > the tax level and even slow down the speed” of automation, Gates
>> > argues.
>> > That’s because the technology and business cases for replacing humans
>> > in
>> a
>> > wide range of jobs are arriving simultaneously, and it’s important to
>> > be
>> > able to manage that displacement. “You cross the threshold of job
>> > replacement of certain activities all sort of at once,” Gates says,
>> citing
>> > warehouse work and driving as some of the job categories that in the
>> next 20
>> > years will have robots doing them.You can watch Gates’ remarks in the
>> video
>> > above. Below is a transcript, lightly edited for style and
>> clarity.Quartz:
>> > What do you think of a robot tax? This is the idea that in order to
>> generate
>> > funds for training of workers, in areas such as manufacturing, who are
>> > displaced by automation, one concrete thing that governments could do
>> > is
>> tax
>> > the installation of a robot in a factory, for example.Bill Gates:
>> Certainly
>> > there will be taxes that relate to automation. Right now, the human
>> worker
>> > who does, say, $50,000 worth of work in a factory, that income is taxed
>> and
>> > you get income tax, social security tax, all those things. If a robot
>> comes
>> > in to do the same thing, you’d think that we’d tax the robot at a
>> > similar
>> > level.And what the world wants is to take this opportunity to make all
>> the
>> > goods and services we have today, and free up labor, let us do a better
>> job
>> > of reaching out to the elderly, having smaller class sizes, helping
>> > kids
>> > with special needs. You know, all of those are things where human
>> > empathy
>> > and understanding are still very, very unique. And we still deal with
>> > an
>> > immense shortage of people to help out there.So if you can take the
>> > labor
>> > that used to do the thing automation replaces, and financially and
>> > training-wise and fulfillment-wise have that person go off and do these
>> > other things, then you’re net ahead. But you can’t just give up that
>> income
>> > tax, because that’s part of how you’ve been funding that level of human
>> > workers.And so you could introduce a tax on robots…There are many ways
>> > to
>> > take that extra productivity and generate more taxes. Exactly how you’d
>> do
>> > it, measure it, you know, it’s interesting for people to start talking
>> about
>> > now. Some of it can come on the profits that are generated by the
>> > labor-saving efficiency there. Some of it can come directly in some
>> > type
>> of
>> > robot tax. I don’t think the robot companies are going to be outraged
>> that
>> > there might be a tax. It’s OK.Could you figure out a way to do it that
>> > didn’t dis-incentivize innovation?Well, at a time when people are
>> > saying
>> > that the arrival of that robot is a net loss because of displacement,
>> > you
>> > ought to be willing to raise the tax level and even slow down the speed
>> of
>> > that adoption somewhat to figure out, “OK, what about the communities
>> where
>> > this has a particularly big impact? Which transition programs have
>> > worked
>> > and what type of funding do those require?”You cross the threshold of
>> > job-replacement of certain activities all sort of at once. So, you
>> > know,
>> > warehouse work, driving, room cleanup, there’s quite a few things that
>> are
>> > meaningful job categories that, certainly in the next 20 years, being
>> > thoughtful about that extra supply is a net benefit. It’s important to
>> have
>> > the policies to go with that.People should be figuring it out. It is
>> really
>> > bad if people overall have more fear about what innovation is going to
>> > do
>> > than they have enthusiasm. That means they won’t shape it for the
>> positive
>> > things it can do. And, you know, taxation is certainly a better way to
>> > handle it than just banning some elements of it. But [innovation]
>> appears in
>> > many forms, like self-order at a restaurant—what do you call that?
>> There’s a
>> > Silicon Valley machine that can make hamburgers without human
>> > hands—seriously! No human hands touch the thing. [Laughs]And you’re
>> > more
>> on
>> > the side that government should play an active role rather than rely on
>> > businesses to figure this out?Well, business can’t. If you want to do
>> > [something about] inequity, a lot of the excess labor is going to need
>> to go
>> > help the people who have lower incomes. And so it means that you can
>> > amp
>> up
>> > social services for old people and handicapped people and you can take
>> the
>> > education sector and put more labor in there. Yes, some of it will go
>> > to,
>> > “Hey, we’ll be richer and people will buy more things.” But the
>> > inequity-solving part, absolutely government’s got a big role to play
>> there.
>> > The nice thing about taxation though, is that it really separates the
>> issue:
>> > “OK, so that gives you the resources, now how do you want to deploy
>> > it?”
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Barrack O. Otieno
>> +254721325277
>> +254733206359
>> Skype: barrack.otieno
>> PGP ID: 0x2611D86A
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> kictanet mailing list
>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/kictanet
>> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KICTANet/
>>
>> Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/
>> mailman/options/kictanet/muriukin%40gmail.com
>>
>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
>> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
>> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
>> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and
>> development.
>>
>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
>> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and
>> bandwidth,
>> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
>> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>

-- 
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254733206359
Skype: barrack.otieno
PGP ID: 0x2611D86A