Live data from Hacker News

If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

english.elpais.com

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#351
post #290

I feel like the USA is not prepared for the 50% unemployment rate it's looking at when the value of labor in many industries drops to pennies. Other countries with safety nets and socialist programs can probably switch to a UBI style economy or simply communism, but the USA is so allergic to such things I don't see anything other than chaos and collapse. And they have allllll those guns too...

Where does that UBI money come from if there are 50% fewer people paying taxes? That's the problem.

Governments can print money.

But yes, you're right, the core problem is that in the USA, people need to justify their existence through labor. If they can't labor, they can't justify their existence (barring the slim few outliers on benefits, who are constantly under attack for being lazy or whatever).

However, if we take a step back and just consider reality for itself, we're just talking about resource allocation. Under the current system, the allocation of resources is dependent upon how much cash any given person can command, which is ostensibly connected to the value of their labor, but in reality, is clumpy and is connected first and foremost to how much cash they or their family historically had, and secondarily how valuable their labor is to capitalism, rather than to humanity. Thus investment bankers make 9x what teachers and EMTs make.

There's no reason we need to play that game. We can simply allocate the resources along more efficient terms, such as, taking the robot-harvested food, having robots put it in self driving trains and trucks, and having it delivered to people who need food.

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#354
post #184

No, not the AI. Just the owner of means of production like AI. The fact that capital owners successfully avoid contributing to the financing of our states and social systems is, in my view, one of the fundamental problems of our time.

> The fact that capital owners successfully avoid contributing to the financing of our states and social systems is, in my view, one of the fundamental problems of our time.

So the government is going to fix this, right? Right...?

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#355

I feel like the USA is not prepared for the 50% unemployment rate it's looking at when the value of labor in many industries drops to pennies. Other countries with safety nets and socialist programs can probably switch to a UBI style economy or simply communism, but the USA is so allergic to such things I don't see anything other than chaos and collapse. And they have allllll those guns too...

We’ll see. I don’t understand how anyone can view this as an inevitably in the short/medium term, yet that’s how a lot of people are talking. There’s really nothing to suggest this change is imminent.

Imminent or not, what jobs will remain? Fixing the robots? Technology strives to reduce cost, labor is typically the largest cost, so is it not inevitable that labor will be made mostly redundant?

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One can’t spend any of the money until it becomes personal assets. The oldest trick in the book is to use unrealized gains as collateral for loans - we even have banks specializing in this. Oh, and the US has a law that erases the tax bill for dead people - you'd be stupid not to use this trick.

Would you also be open to paying taxes in your 401k yearly based on unrealized gains?

When those unrealized gains are spread across 10s-100s of millions of people it's fine because statistically gains are always being realized. As those holdings get further concentrated that stops happening.

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insofar as productivity is a sign of the system getting imbalanced towards capital, the system should be pushed back and the everyman thrown a bone.

To what extent is productivity a sign of the system getting imbalanced towards capital? That relationship is not at all clear to me.

If productivity is increasing but not average salary, then by definition the additional wealth is being taken by the owners of capital.

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agree! I find quite concerning that this point is not immediate in any conversation about AI or robots impacting the number of jobs, and the subsequent conversation about innovating new taxes. AI and robots are capital as any other automation on a factory, and capital gains should be taxed appropriately. This is not a new thing completely separate from the untouchable status quo wrt existing taxes. If it tickles…

This is not an easy question. It seemingly boils down to: what are fair ways to extract value from citizens for the shared value of the state? However, the root questions are: what should the state provide, how much, and of what nature? A secondary question then becomes how important the redistributive aspect is. That’s what you’re seemingly alluding to when you say: people work, get taxed on it, but others automate…

> the core benefit of automation

The core benefit of automation is to give back time to humans to free us to do more creative things with our big beautiful brains. At least, that would be the core benefit if humanity was on a positive trajectory.

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#359
post #184

No, not the AI. Just the owner of means of production like AI. The fact that capital owners successfully avoid contributing to the financing of our states and social systems is, in my view, one of the fundamental problems of our time.

> The fact that capital owners successfully avoid contributing to the financing of our states and social systems is, in my view, one of the fundamental problems of our time. So the government is going to fix this, right? Right...?

Yes by having the Federal Reserve print more money!

Re: If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

#360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did a bit of mild googling. 1% of Americans control 30% of the wealth of the nation, and apparently 12% of property. It's more than reasonable that people with that much wealth to their name pay the vast majority of the taxes, as it used to be. From a nation building perspective, there's no reason to allow a couple hundred people to wield 52,000,000,000,000$ worth of assets. It means the economy has gotten far too…

1% of Americans would be over 3 million people, not a couple hundred.

.1% hold 12.6% of national wealth so that's 300,000 people. It tends to clump at the top, apparently.

In any case, it seems a bit bizarre to me that the wealth is distributed so unevenly. Do you believe those 3 million people work so hard that their value is that much higher than the combined output of 297 million people?

Post reply on HN