Live data from Hacker News

If AI replaces workers, should it also pay taxes?

english.elpais.com

61–70 of 1001 posts

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

#61
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to expand on this. The wheelbarrow increases the value of labor. It's not a good analogy.

It increases the value for that one person who uses the wheelbarrow sure, but it does not raise the value of labour in aggregate. The same would be true of AI tools.

Taken to the extreme, you're arguing that tools have only lowered the value of labor in aggregate and that seems obviously false.

The value of labor is dependent on the demand of that labor and tools increase demand by increasing what projects can be done.

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

#62

By this logic owners of wheel barrows should be taxed for all the manual labour jobs the wheel barrow destroyed.

I'm not so sure this argument is valid. The invention of the wheel barrow created new jobs in wheel barrow manufacturing and distribution. On the other hand, the promise/threat of AI seems to be the complete displacement of humans in many industries without creating alternative employment for the vast majority.

Wheelbarrows are pretty simple devices, I’m sure many people just made them on their own. But even accepting this point, there’s no particular reason why we should expect that every invention until now generated new and different types of work, just not this one. The people talking about complete displacement are selling you a story because it gets them clicks and sells books.

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

#63
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have "disappeared" ~97% of jobs since the Industrial Revolution started, and no increased unemployment has materialized. Until you understand how something that counter intuitive happened, you should not speculate on how AI replacing current jobs will play out!

This analogy happens a lot, and it might be true, but it's not clear to me that they're comparable. The Industrial Revolution mostly ate mechanical labor and created more 'thinking' and knowledge worker jobs closer to the top of the stack. AGI goes after the information / decision-making layer itself. And it's unclear how much remains once those are automated.

I consider the Industrial Revolution to still be ongoing, since jobs have constantly been automated away by technology for 250 years. Some like to split that time into separate eras. In that paradigm we're now in the Fifth Industrial Revolution (Industry 5.0).

Whatever you call it, jobs keep getting "stolen" by technology, and yet employment rates stay high and average living standard keeps rising.

I'm genuinely fascinated by how this keeps happening, decade after decade, and yet most people are convinced the opposite is happening. I'm old enough to remember this exact discussion from 50 years ago.

We all see and interact with jobs that did not exist 20 years ago, and many of us work those jobs. And yet... this knowledge is somehow compartmentalized away from future expectations.

If you want a theoretical framework for why this keeps happening, my thought is that unemployed humans are an unused resource. And capitalism is really good at finding ways to use those.

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

#64
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It increases the value for that one person who uses the wheelbarrow sure, but it does not raise the value of labour in aggregate. The same would be true of AI tools.

Taken to the extreme, you're arguing that tools have only lowered the value of labor in aggregate and that seems obviously false. The value of labor is dependent on the demand of that labor and tools increase demand by increasing what projects can be done.

I did not argue the tools lowered the value of labour in aggregate - I merely said that they did not increase it. However, the effect on the individual and the group are different. If you have 10 people carrying boulders across the field, and you introduce a wheelbarrow, and now you have one person carrying the same amount of boulders across the field, the total aggregate value of labour has stayed the same. This particular person can certainly capture more of that aggregate value than they could have before, but the total value has not gone up. It’s also true that now you have lowered the cost of moving boulders across the field, so yes, there could be more demand for whatever it is you’re selling and that could mean that maybe you need two or three workers with wheelbarrows. but I think if you’re going to talk about the value of aggregate labor, you have to control for the amount of demand.

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

#65
post #30

By this logic owners of wheel barrows should be taxed for all the manual labour jobs the wheel barrow destroyed.

Exactly. This is such a silly argument. The article takes the argument "if a lot of jobs disappeared since they are now done effectively for free, what about tax revenue??" It really misses the forrest from the trees. You're transported into a world in which efficiencies mean that much fewer people need to work, but somehow government services and entitlements are unchanged and we need to hit roughly the same percent…

> You're transported into a world in which efficiencies mean that much fewer people need to work,

It's a matter of perspective. I'm pretty sure that from their perspective those people very much need to work because they need to pay taxes, rent, insurance, food etc...

What mechanism is going to ensure that the increased productivity is going to result in lower cost of living for these people such that they no longer require to spend so much of their life working to survive?

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

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sure this argument is valid. The invention of the wheel barrow created new jobs in wheel barrow manufacturing and distribution. On the other hand, the promise/threat of AI seems to be the complete displacement of humans in many industries without creating alternative employment for the vast majority.

you think when the wheel barrow was invented it was obvious that new jobs would be created?!?

A little known economic fact – the wheel was actually invented billions of years ago by bacteria and reinvented by every species since. It’s just that they all held off using it until they could be sure that it would create jobs. Thankfully thousands of years ago, human economists finally did the math and let everyone know that it checked out!

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

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have "disappeared" ~97% of jobs since the Industrial Revolution started, and no increased unemployment has materialized. Until you understand how something that counter intuitive happened, you should not speculate on how AI replacing current jobs will play out!

Can you give a source for the 97% claim?

I have two ways to think of it, and both give similar numbers.

A: 250 years ago, 98% worked in farming. Today it's 2% (who produce more food!). Assume that the other 2% are at least twice as productive, and you get that 3% of the population now produces as much as 100% back then.

B: It's hard to directly estimate how much GDP per person has increased in 250 years. But the typical number economists get when trying is that it's 30x as big. Which means 3.3% of today's workforce produces as much (per person) as the whole workforce did back then.

Both A and B can be critiqued, but the precise numbers don't really matter for the argument.

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

#68
post #27

"In the United States, for example, about 85% of federal tax revenue comes from labor income" That's the problem. AI has the same tax problems as corporations. But US corporate taxes are historically very low and easy to evade.

The world's richest elites have managed to evade many types of taxes, using loopholes in tax laws and by controlling government policies to make them more beneficial to the ultra rich.

In many of the world's richest nations, the wealth inequality has become super inequality.

And for the ultra rich, the recent pandemic was a boon, not a bane. This pandemic was the best time in history, if you are a billionaire.

* World’s top 1% richest elites own more wealth than 95% of humanity, says Oxfam.

* The top 1 percent richest own 43 percent of all global financial assets.

* Despite being home to 79 percent of the world’s population, Global South countries own just 31 percent of global wealth.

* According to Oxfam, the fortunes of the world’s richest people increased as much in the span of 24 months (2000-2021) as they did in 23 years. Now the bottom half of the global population would have to toil for an estimated 112 years to earn what the top 1% now rake in over just 12 months.

* “The pandemic—full of sorrow and disruption for most of humanity—has been one of the best times in recorded history for the billionaire class.”, says Oxfam.

* The world's richest people significantly increased their wealth during the pandemic, with two-thirds of the $42 trillion in new wealth going to the wealthiest 1%. Billionaires got 54% richer during pandemic. This surge in billionaire wealth occurred alongside rising poverty rates, as many individuals faced economic hardships due to the pandemic. This has raised concerns about money flowing to the well-heeled instead of to services for those hit hardest by COVID-19. It also points to broader potential implications for a sustainable reset of the global economy.

* Less than 8 cents in every dollar of tax revenue collected in G20 countries comes from taxes on wealth, says Oxfam.

* Oxfam found that the wealthiest 1% of the world population emit as much carbon pollution as the poorest two-thirds of the entire human population.

* “Only 0.4 percent of the world’s largest corporations are publicly committed to paying workers a living wage and support a living wage in their value chains”, Oxfam wrote.

* Oxfam likewise discovered that seven out of 10 of the largest corporations on the planet either have a billionaire as their CEO or have a billionaire as their principal shareholder.

* The world's richest people have significantly increased their wealth, with the top ten billionaires collectively adding over $500 billion to their fortunes this year, largely due to the booming AI sector. As of now, their combined net worth is approximately $2.5 trillion.

* 148 top corporations made $1.8 trillion in profits, 52 percent up on 3-year average, and dished out huge payouts to rich shareholders while hundreds of millions faced cuts in real-term pay.

* The world’s richest 1% own 43% of global financial assets, and the wealth of the top five billionaires has doubled since 2020, while 60% of humanity got poorer, according to a report by Oxfam.

* The five richest people on Earth in 2023 were Elon Musk, Bernard Arnault, Jeff Bezos, Larry Ellison, and Warren Buffett. Their combined wealth skyrocketed from $340 billion in 2020 to $869 billion just three years later. Adjusted for inflation, this was a real increase of 114%.

* Every year, America’s richest citizens paper over their earnings with losses and use other creative accounting strategies to shelter their fortunes, as the tax code allows them to do. As a result, the country’s billionaires pay lower tax rates than many of its millionaires do. Indeed, they pay lower tax rates than many middle-class professionals.

* Elon Musk, the world's richest man who's on track to become the world's first trillionaire, hasn't paid income tax for years.

* Many of the wealthiest individuals in the world, including billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Warren Buffett, Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg have been reported to pay little or no federal income taxes, due to legal tax avoidance strategies.

* Shockingly, the Billionaires in the U.S. pay a smaller tax rate than most teachers and nurses.

* ProPublica has obtained a vast cache of IRS information showing how billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Warren Buffett pay little in income tax compared to their massive wealth — sometimes, even nothing.

* According to leaked tax returns highlighted in a ProPublica investigation, the 25 richest Americans paid $13.6 billion in taxes from 2014-2018—a “true” tax rate of just 3.4 percent on $401 billion of income.

* A new Oxfam analysis shows the wealth of the 10 richest U.S. billionaires increased by $365 billion in just 12 months, based on data from Forbes.

* According to a 2021 White House study, the wealthiest 400 billionaire families in the U.S. paid an average federal individual tax rate of just 8.2 percent. For comparison, the average American taxpayer in the same year paid 13 percent.

* The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Trump’s signature first-term domestic-policy package, helped these billionaires keep more of their money. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed this summer, extends the TCJA’s tax cuts, creates new business loopholes, and lowers taxes on estates. To help offset the revenue losses, the Trump administration is stripping health coverage from millions of low-income Americans and shrinking the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The rich, including Trump, will keep getting richer. The poor will pay for it.

Sources:

https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/worlds-top-1-own-mor...

https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/stories/do-the-rich-pay...

https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trov...

https://itep.org/tax-day-billionaires-wealth-inequality-corp...

https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/08/billiona...

https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/wealth-five-richest-...

https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2024/01/18/billionaires-rich...

https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/less-8-cents-every-d...

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2020/10/the-rich-got-richer-...

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2023/01/16/how-the-worlds-...

https://fortune.com/2022/05/23/pandemic-billionaire-wealth-o...

https://www.cnbctv18.com/world/wealth-of-worlds-top-10-billi...

https://www.businessinsider.com/10-richest-people-ai-boom-te...

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

#69
There are already tax schemes for productive enterprise, and this is not the first time people have been displaced by technology. It happens all the time. Also, does it matter if it's AI doing the production vs overseas labor? If you're worried that people won't be able to afford to buy the output of the AI, that kind of implies that they can work for cheaper than the AI (and can thus outcompete it, at least on average). In the long run, things will reach a new and probably more abundant state. In the short or medium term, we may have some pain and need to strategize how to help people adapt.

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

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. No, we are not losing. 2. If it was true that we were losing, then tax revenue would be the least of our worries.

1. We are absolutely losing. Wealth inequality has never been higher in human history. How does a single human amass such wealth when his physical and intellectual output doesn’t even match that level of equivalent worth? The first reason is he scrapes it off others, and the second reason is technological automation. AI is just one bump in the road of technological innovation magnifying work output. 2. I never said t…

This was an article about AI and income tax policy, but you’re making arguments about inequality.
Post reply on HN