12

The robot that takes your job should pay taxes, says Bill Gates

Posted by freedomforall 1 week, 1 day ago to Government
69 comments | Share | Flag

Gates has gone full statist looter. Typical action to eliminate future competition by inventors smarter than Gates. Disgusting.
SOURCE URL: https://qz.com/911968/bill-gates-the-robot-that-takes-your-job-should-pay-taxes/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 11
    Posted by Esceptico 1 week ago
    Reminds me of the old joke about robots.

    A Guy goes into a bar where all the bartenders are robots:
    The guy sits down at the bar and the robot asks: “What will you have?
    The guy replies, “Whiskey.” The robot brings back his drink and asks, “What’s your IQ?”
    The guy say, “168”
    The robot talks about physics, string theory and space exploration.
    After the guy leaves, he pauses at the street corner and thinks about what he just encountered, and decides to go back.
    The robot asks, “What’s your drink?”
    The guy answers, “Whiskey.”
    The robot serves the drink and asks, “What’s your IQ?”
    This time the man replies, “100.”
    The robot talks about Budweiser, and football.
    The guy finishes his drink, leaves, but decides he'll try again.
    The guy enters the bar and the robot asks him what he wants to drink.
    The guy replies, “Whiskey.”
    The robot serves the drink and asks, “What’s your IQ?”
    This time the guy answers, “50.”
    The robot leans in real close and slowly asks: “So, are you people still unhappy Hillary lost?”
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  CBJ 1 week ago
    The same logic could have been applied to Microsoft in the 1980's to "raise the tax level and even slow down the speed of that adoption" of its software. I wonder how Gates would have responded to such a proposal at the time.

    Regardless, a "robot tax" would give a competitive advantage to any robot company located in a country that did not impose such a tax.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by hattrup 1 week ago
      Spot on. Excel and Word were huge productivity increases for many areas. Perhaps Gates should pay for all the Bookkeepers we no longer have? Or pay a special tax for enabling the creation and improvement in robot and AI technology. Gates is well into and at the bottom of the deep end of the pool on this one from many perspectives - starting with having a government "manage" the introduction and expansion of robot technology (although he is about 40 years late to the game).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 1 week ago
    I didn't expect this kind of addled thinking from one of the "culprits" who fostered the computer revolution that is leading to highly capable robots. It reminds me of the automobile-resistant politicians who made laws restricting car speeds to walking speed, requiring someone walk in front of the infernal machine carrying a red lantern.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  blarman 1 week ago
      Gates wasn't really all that good at computer science. He worked on his version of the Basic computing language, but he was no Jobs or Wozniak. He had one single insight - the idea of licensing rather than selling software - that made him all his money. The rest was a combination of luck, timing, and outright IP theft. See "Pirates of Silicon Valley". His tactics with Internet Explorer, etc. are entirely consistent with the globalist/statist he is now.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 1 week ago
        And consistent with every large business concern that I can recall, some more so, some marginally less so. Especially true in the large size software business.
        imo, Microsoft has gone more toward the dark side after Gates stopped managing the business. But so has Gates;^)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  blarman 1 week ago
          "Microsoft has gone more toward the dark side after Gates stopped managing the business."

          That was certainly true of Ballmer, but Microsoft's current CEO is actually encouraging more adoption of open standards, adherence to open standards, and collaboration with other software vendors. Overall I'm encouraged. Of course I think the primary impetus for this has been the disruptive innovation in the cellphone market, which is currently dominated by Google and Apple. Microsoft's marketshare is a paltry 2-3%. They're doing slightly better in the tablet arena, but they are nowhere as dominant as they are in the PC market. Hooray for competition!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 days, 17 hours ago
      You made that one up, didn't you, Dr. Zarkov 99?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 2 days, 16 hours ago
        Nope. That was one of the silly laws that had never been taken off the books and forgotten. It was a South Carolina law from when the horseless carriages were first hitting the road in the late 1890s, discovered in an audit of the state laws in the mid 1960s. Needless to say after everyone got a chuckle out of it, the state legislature quickly rescinded it, lest some lamebrain decided to use it for ticketing people they didn't like.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by walkabout 1 week ago
    So much here. So much. First and foremost: Businesses don't PAY taxes, they only collect them. Owners of things pay taxes and consumers of things pay taxes! Either the owner of a method of production (stockholder) will pay the tax as assessed (such as is done with property taxes) or the price of the good the robot manufactures will reflect the additional tax (no mater how it is assessed). Taxing income is immoral -- as determined by Western Civilization beginning in the 1800's when Slavery began to be outlawed (only recently completed in many parts of the world). Slavery is the LEGAL seizure of part or all of the work product of one person by some other entity using the legal force and potential violence against the first individuals (it does not matter if the receiving party is a wealthy aristocrat or the Treasurer of the government.
    This slavery seizes the power rightfully belonging to We the People and abuses the People with it. End Income Taxation and replace it with the much more honest FairTax (H.R. 25) or with a transparent Wealth Tax -- again designed to be obvious, open and transparent.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 week ago
      I agree for the most part.
      Replace income tax with much lower (limited constitutional) spending. The taxes are what allow centralization of power and statist meddling that destroys liberty and destroys free markets. While the source of taxes matters somewhat, its the agreement to allowing anything that funds large government that is a bigger problem.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 week ago
      Exactly!

      Income Tax = SLAVERY!

      Tax consumption/transfers (Vat/Sales/Fairtax), but NEVER EVER EVER Income.
      What people do not understand is that TECHNICALLY, bartered items are taxable.
      If you grow your own food, and were completely self-sufficient, the courts have twisted meaning to IMPLY that you CREATED AND BOUGHT that stuff, simply by bartering your time to get it, and therefore, it is taxable income.

      Also, why does a business get to write off it's COSTS against its income, but people don't, per se. I mean, to live/feed myself, they give me THEIR allowance. BS. I need Energy Costs, Cost of ALL insurances required. Cost of my car.

      They are taxing GROSS Income, not NET (what I take home, after what it costs me to LIVE/OPERATE).

      Again. I support the Fair Tax. Or a Flat Tax on products. If I don't buy, I don't pay. Then EVERYONE, including Illegals will be forced to pay their fair share. Also, only pay for products NOT SERVICES (A service is income).

      But Governments want ALL the revenue they can get.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by walkabout 1 week ago
        One key, that is seldom if ever mentioned, is that whatever tax system is adopted paying tax should be avoidable. In the FairTax you can raise your own food, and more importantly buy used things. In this way taxes will not get too high. As price increases due to taxation, more and more people will only buy used things and more will put in a garden. Self limiting!!!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 1 week ago
    I propose Capitalist Robots. Each Capitalist (worker) should either do his job or buy a robot to do it and have a company "hire" his robot. The worker with no savings will need to work and save to invest in a robot. The more capital you have the more sophisticated robot you will be able to buy and the more an employer will pay for it's use. This robotic meritocracy, will lead to better and better robots and higher productivity. Men will be free to do human tasks and to be creative. You will always need to keep your robot in good working order and technologically up to date and be aware of the financial health of the employer. This would also solve the mobility problem because as an industry shifts geographically you don't need to move, just send your robot.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Tbird7553 1 week ago
    Tax, tax, tax. I’ve always thought how unfortunate that some of the most wealthy have similar mindsets. They could do so much more with the mindset of creating more wealth.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by JuliBMe 1 week ago
      It's a combination of guilt for having so much, not wanting to be on the leftist radar for their envious pitchforks, and wanting to keep what you have. In other words, COWARDLINESS.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 1 week ago
    I have thought for a while now that there would be a per hour of use tax on robots that was the same as the wages that they "displaced". It will usher in a whole new bureaucracy to just define and figure the taxes. Kind of like the custom duty fiasco.

    The real issue is what IS a robot, and if the existing ones are grandfathered in.

    We are surrounded by "robots"- elevators are robots really. How about those fast food soda machines we use every day. Most foods are made using automation, which is a form of robot technology. Your car is run by multiple automated robots to control combustion in the engine, help you steer and brake. What about the automatic tuners in your radio and TV- more robot technology.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 week, 1 day ago
    So how much should Microsoft be taxed for spell and grammar check? Taxing robots generates a definition problem.

    As I have said many times, I do think that the day will come when a robot based economy can make all the goods and services that we need for everyone to have at least a "middle class" living with less than 5% of the people working.

    When that happens we will have to have something like a universal income so that the 95% can actually buy the stuff instead of it piling up in warehouses while people starve in the streets.

    Where the money comes from to pay that is an interesting question.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 1 week ago
      Lets suppose I lived on a farm with robots to make all my food, cook it, diagnose diseases, and basically take care of me. I would be able to spend most of my time on either creating things or just lounging on the beach. The only unemployment would be my own, and that might not be so bad.

      People are going to have to up their game in order to be of use in that sort of economy. Sort of like what has happened with the rise of China. People in america by and large havent upped their game, and as a result have lost a lot of jobs permanently to the Chinese. American workers are a far cry from chinese workers in terms of motivation, requirement for pay, and learning. Very few things are actually made here in America, and more and more creative things are being developed and made in china. It means USA is in trouble in years to come. We have become far and lazy.

      Add automation to the mix, and the lower level jobs Americans have been satisfied doing will be taken over by China today and automation with robots tomorrow. People here just have to find ways that the chinese and robots cant yet do.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 week ago
        There will come a time, and it may not be in the too distant future, when jobs that the "robots" can't do will be very few. There may always be people who want services from other human beings, maybe, I prefer a well designed automated system to interacting with a human for most things.

        The threshold event is robots that can not only do repetitive work but deal with varied environments and have the ability to manipulate objects that humans do. I think of being able to clean hotel rooms as an example that's harder than picking fruit.

        When that happens, we will all be pretty much on that farm.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 1 week ago
          I agree with you that robots will get smarter and more versatile. Robot creativity will be farther off I think, and there ARE somethings that humans would prefer from other humans. But most things that we want could be offered faster and more consistently by robots (not subject to whims, emotional outbursts, political biases, and other human consistencies).

          I very much am ready for fast food ordering and food delivery by robots, as well as order taking in sit down restaurants thats done at the table with a robot that LISTENS to what I want and doesnt expect some exhorbitant tip for simply taking my order.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 week ago
      It'll come from those that work, those that invent, those that oversee; To pay those with no conscience, no mind and no ability to do anything but Take from others...that has been their wish the whole time.

      Seems to me that taxing a business based on his robotic workers so as to pay for Real Humans to do nothing, should cause one to think...why don't I just employ Real People.

      Robots don't "Earn" a wage but the company does...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 1 week ago
        Imagine I invent an robot with significant AI capabilities. That robot has considerable latitude to act and, without my instruction, designs and builds an improved model of itself. That improved model repeats the process building something even more improved, it constructs a bunch of them. They then decide to build a factory to make more robots and do so.

        I went on to do other things and don't even know they did this. In theory I invented it, but how much credit for invention can I claim for an invention I don't know exists. And I'm certainly not supervising.

        If the robots built by the factory are sold, who earned the money?

        Our economic thinking assumes that the automation is clearly designed, built, and controlled by humans. An assumption that is starting to get a bit fuzzy and will become more so as our AI becomes better.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 week ago
          Still, it has no need for wages, a home, school, health care. As autonomous as it might be...it has no needs except the energy to power it. So the money earned by selling the products it makes would pay for that energy.

          No matter who earned the money, the robots and or the inventor...the robots are not humans and have not human needs.

          They might be successful a imitating humans, human awareness of their environment, awareness of their production and an imitation conscience...it still will not be human and never have the same consciousness, self introspection, privy to the insights the human mind is capable of and perhaps the same effect upon existence, creation, that humans may have.
          They are and should always be, a machine.

          That's my view and I'll be sticking to it for now.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 week, 1 day ago
    Then why would a factory use robots if they have to pay taxes for them?
    Didn't the parasitical humanoids get enough sales taxes for every itty bitty part and the sales taxes on the finished product...not to mention Taxes on the company by the town/ city as property/machinery!?!?!?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 days, 17 hours ago
    I have not watched the video yet; I have limited time at this machine. But I did read the comments by Gates. I have in the past thought he was being picked on and treated unjustly, by now I am thoroughly disgusted with him. Another means of getting us further away from freedom.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 5 days, 17 hours ago
    Bill Gates should be willing to pay an income tax on all of the programs he wrote that took jobs away from people, his nanobots are destroying jobs that used to be done by thousands with pencil and paper.
    I think Bill may have always had leftist leanings, not possible for me to know for certain but he seemed to be uninvolved in politics until the size of his business suddenly became apparent to the power mongers who then threatened to destroy him for being too big by claiming that he was a virtual monopoly and had to be controlled. I think it was Senator Orrin Hatch who stated something along the lines of; "He should have come to us sooner to make sure what he was doing was okay!" He managed to keep the government from breaking up his little company, cost him millions in lawyer fees and corporate donations to the power brokers and then he turned hard left in his political leanings. I think it might be more to protect his holdings but it is probably what he really believes too. Those who have large enough holdings can protect themselves from destruction by going along with the socialist program. If he ever strays he will be destroyed and then he will be complaining; "But I was on your side!"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Turfprint 6 days, 4 hours ago
    "The robot that takes your job should pay taxes."
    I find this a very interesting premise and am reluctant to dismiss it out of hand. I intend to think it through. :-) BTW I believe AI will eventually become a reality. At least to some extent and to some extent it is a reality right now and smarter than some politicians
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 days, 22 hours ago
      What portion of the investment in the robot was paid for by the state? Since the state creates no surplus, it cannot make any investment and it should receive no dividends in any form- especially not via taxes that are merely legalized theft.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo