Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

english.elpais.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

841–850 of 1001 posts

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

#841

Post by nradov »

acituan wrote: post #810
nradov wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually real wages have increased a lot since the 70s if you count employer contributions to employee heath insurance. The problem is that a lot of that money is being wasted by an inefficient healthcare system, and employers probably shouldn't even be involved in sponsoring group health plans in the first place.

Employers paid for healthcare in 1970s too, and even for higher percentages of the workforce. If there is a premium inflation surpassed the CPI, that is still inflation, not real growth. If there’s an inflation problem in delivering a temporally comparable service, that is not a “real wage” item for the employee [1]. So what the nominal figure today shouldn’t be relevant. I agree it shouldn’t be an employer item too,…

I don't understand your point. Very few people in their 70s have employer sponsored group health insurance. Most are only on Medicare, perhaps with a commercial Medicare Advantage or Medicare Supplement plan.

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

#843

Post by rtkwe »

haroldp wrote: post #825
UltraSane wrote: post #821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who buys what you make if you need no employees?

Now that jacquard loom has left so many textile workers unemployed?

We've launched dozens of shuttles below the minimum temp threshold before there's no reason to delay this launch...

Also that's a singular industry, if the current crop of AI companies deliver what their hype and valuation demands it's a shock across the whole economy not isolated.

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

#844

Post by unethical_ban »

thethimble wrote: post #763
ceejayoz wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But you cannot seriously argue that capital owners "avoid contributing to the financing of our states and social systems". Sure we can. Peter Thiel managed to put $5 billion in his Roth IRA. https://www.propublica.org/article/billionaires-tax-avoidanc... "Using stock deals unavailable to most people, Thiel has taken a retirement account worth less than $2,000 in 1999 and spun it into a $5 billion windfall... What’s…

But this strategy is also eligible to you. Nothing is stopping you from turning your Roth IRA into a multi billion tax free gain.

I choose to interpret this as satire.

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

#845

Post by AnthonyMouse »

malfist wrote: post #773
icedchai wrote: post #767

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want to tax people twice? Corporations pay taxes on profit. Shareholders pay taxes on dividends and capital gains.

Sure. Why not? We already get taxed multiple ways. I pay income tax and sales tax

> We already get taxed multiple ways. I pay income tax and sales tax

Shouldn't we also not do that?

Suppose you pay a 25% income tax and then a 10% sales tax. You're paying the same amount, almost a third of your income, as you would with a 47% sales tax. Which to begin with misleads people into thinking their rate is lower than it is, and on top of that incurs the significant overhead of needing two independent collection infrastructures.

Why isn't it better to just pick one?

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

#846

Post by haroldp »

rtkwe wrote: post #843
haroldp wrote: post #825

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now that jacquard loom has left so many textile workers unemployed?

We've launched dozens of shuttles below the minimum temp threshold before there's no reason to delay this launch... Also that's a singular industry, if the current crop of AI companies deliver what their hype and valuation demands it's a shock across the whole economy not isolated.

> Also that's a singular industry

200 years ago, 95% of the workers in my country worked in subsistence farming. Today, only 2% are farmers. The whole spectrum of labor has turned upside down and upside down again, in that time. It has certainly not been a singular industry.

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

#847

Post by nradov »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #829
njarboe wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'taxed fairly' This could be almost any tax system depending on the what one views as "fair".

Nah, you could reasonably regard a tax system where everybody pays <2% of their income in tax as fair and likewise one where everybody pays 50%, but there is no way to call a system fair where ordinary working people pay higher effective rates than multinational corporations.

The tax rate for corporations should be zero. The need to do tax accounting and associated financial engineering is a deadweight economic loss. Eliminate corporate income tax and raise taxes on the highest income employees and investors to make the change revenue neutral. Ultimately the profits flow to those individuals one way or another so better to collect all the tax revenue from them anyway. This change would increase economic growth and benefit everyone.

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

#849

Post by jmward01 »

Fundamentally we need safety valves for labor supply that always creates a net advantage for workers, but how? My take has always been that advances in productivity that reduce the need for labor should be given back to the workforce via incentives like:

- sabbaticals/funded retraining opportunities: People leave to train creating a need for labor and at the same time increasing the value of labor. This would also create liquidity in the labor market since people would have opportunity to leave their current field and go to a different one.

- strong encouragement to retire earlier: Fewer people in the workforce and more people spending retirement means more demand for jobs and more demand for goods and services.

- limit the workweek more: Same argument as retirement

All of these have positives and negatives, but unless we start thinking about things like this we will get a world where labor is at a massive disadvantage and all the issues that leads to.

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

#850

Post by [deleted] »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #587
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Folks like to hate on capital gains tax. I think it's perceived as a rich-person deal. But homeowners, do they get taxed each year on the increase in value of their house? Almost the same thing, but not hated on the same way.

You live in a house. Secondary residences however are not tax deductible?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN