Bill Gates: "Robots must pay taxes"

Bill Gates: If a robot performs human task, it must pay taxes as such

Bill Gates Founder of Microsoft in an interview with the guys from QZ, in this interview gave many opinions about the role that robots are playing in our lives today

Robots are currently replacing humans in many areas, to the point that they already perform jobs that were only for humans. Bills Gates asserts that governments should limit their use in companies, as a way to slow or delay the imminent replacement of man by machine.

At the same time, other types of employment should be financed.

The richest man in the world, a techno-optimist, founder of Microsoft, one of the main players in the role of artificial intelligence technology, adopts this position before the increasingly integrated body of robots in human tasks.

Putting a tax on robots could fund jobs that could be for the elderly or maybe for people working with children in schools.

But, above all, governments have a duty to supervise these types of programs, rather than leaving them to companies, all in order to repeal tasks for people with the lowest incomes to help them.

This idea is not just theory: EU lawmakers believe and consider a proposal to people who own robots, must pay taxes.

Taxes that would serve to pay to train workers who lose their jobs, although last February 16 legislators rejected this idea in the last instance.

"You have to be willing to raise taxes and reduce the rate of speed that automation is leading today."

This refers to technology business cases to replace humans in a wide range of jobs that will be given simultaneously and it is important to be in the ability to handle this shift.

"The threshold of substitution of jobs will be crossed in certain activities in due time".

Jobs like warehouses and driving are some of the jobs that could be in the procimos 20 years only made by robots.

But what do you think of a Robot tax?

This is the way to generate funds to train workers, in areas such as manufacturing, which today are displaced by automation, the most concrete that can be done by governments, is to impose taxes on the installation of robots in factories, to quote An example.

For Gates, there would be no taxes that would relate to automation.

At present a human worker who, for example, makes $ 50,000 in his work at any factory is taxed his income and gets income tax, social security tax and things like that.

But if a robot would do the same, it would be thinking that that robot would be taxed at an equal level.

What the world wants is to take advantage of the opportunities to make all the services and goods that are at hand nowadays.

By freeing the labor, it would be less labor to reach the third age, would have smaller classes, could help children with special needs, all those activities, where empathy and human understanding prevail.

So that you could take all the labor that was used to be replaced with the automation, that person could go out and perform other actions, things like these before the granddaughter.

But income tax could not be waived, that is what has been financed as a novelty of human workers.

And so it would be imperative to introduce a tax on robots?

There are many ways that additional productivity generates more taxes, exactly would be done without measuring it, it would be very interesting for people to talk about the issue now.

Many of those who could have profits that would be generated by the efficiency of the labor savings.

Some that could directly enter some kind of tax on robots. Although I do not think that the robot companies would be outraged that it would impose a tax like this, everything would be fine.

Can you find a way to not lose innovation?

These are moments in which people will say that the arrival of these robots means net losses because of the displacement, since it is necessary to be able to increase taxes, in order to slow down the implementation of the automated technology.

What would happen to the communities that would have a very large impact, which transitional measures have already been worked, and what type of funding would not be required?

When you cross the threshold of job substitution in certain activities, such as warehousing, driving, cleaning rooms, and a myriad of activities that are categorized as significant jobs, which will undoubtedly be in the next 20 years, we will see how Are replaced by automation.

Reflecting on this because of the offer that would be a net profit.

The most important thing would be to have policies aimed at that substitution.

We must all be clear, that if it is bad, it is worse to be afraid of that imminent innovation, that only those who have enthusiasm in the progress are accepted. You have to shape the positive things that can be achieved.

Latributacion is without doubt the best choice in the prohibition of some elements.

The innovation is already being implemented, and we can see it in restaurants when we make a self-order.

In Silicon Valley, you can prepare a hamburger without human intervention.

And who is more on the side of that government should play an active role rather than relying on companies to solve this?

In the business world there are things you can not do, if you want to do something against inequality, you would have to direct all the excess labor to help people with the lowest incomes.

This would amplify social services, for the elderly and people with disabilities, could help the education sector and generate more jobs in that country.

Many will say we are going to be richer people will buy more things, but in the part of the solution of inequality, definitely has the Government, this plays an important role there, the good thing about taxes, is that they give more resources , Would you now consider deploying them?