[kictanet] Why Bill Gates would tax robots

Tue Feb 28 10:21:47 EAT 2017

Barrack,

Am in business and I know it's the bottom line that counts at the expense
of people.
Now we further what to fire the already strained employee replace them with
a robot
for a fatter bank account and cash you don't need.
I believe Bill Gates been the billionaire he is has realised you can have
all the cash
and wealth you can get but it all without meaning what really matters is
the humanity.

Regards,
Job Muriuki,

Skype: heviejob

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20170228/0c87f820/attachment.htm>