Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
The severance penalties I suggested were meant to be a deterrent of job elimination, not a mechanism to stop automation all together. As for economic distribution, if automation will lead to higher taxes for companies isn't that essentially the same thing as the penalty I suggested? You could even argue that companies would be more in favour of a one time payment than an endless higher tax bracket.
|
Automation leads to job elimination. Their is no such thing as retraining when the physical number of jobs has been reduced. So what your proposal is doing is making automation more expensive by incentivising existing human labour over robots.
Automation doesn't lead to higher taxes necessarily. And certainly doesn't target the automaters. I am saying that income inequality needs to be addressed politically rather than through the prevention of automation.
You seem to look at the small picture. 1 job being lost and how that person can be kept employed. Whereas the Macro picture is much more important. All jobs eventually will be lost so delaying that doesn't help, how do we ensure that as jobs are lost society continues to function in a reasonably equitable manner.
The answer to this isn't to punish automaters.