SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the who-is-going-to-ask-if-I-want-fries? dept.
72 years after [Clarence Saunders] attempted to patent his idea, advances in robotics, artificial intelligence, and other technologies are making the dream of a worker-free store a reality. And American cashiers may soon be checking out.
A recent analysis by Cornerstone Capital Group suggests that 7.5m retail jobs – the most common type of job in the country – are at "high risk of computerization", with the 3.5m cashiers likely to be particularly hard hit.
Another report, by McKinsey, suggests that a new generation of high-tech grocery stores that automatically charge customers for the goods they take – no check-out required – and use robots for inventory and stocking could reduce the number of labor hours needed by nearly two-thirds. It all translates into millions of Americans' jobs under threat.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DannyB on Thursday August 17 2017, @02:59PM (2 children)
Don't pay robots. Tax them.
Taxes will be complicated. So Robots will seek help of professional bean countants.
That tax revenue would then to go welfare programs for wealthy children unable to find people who will voluntarily date them.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 3, Touché) by maxwell demon on Thursday August 17 2017, @04:03PM
Taxes will be complicated.
You know who excels at solving complicated problems which involve numbers? Computers.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bobs on Thursday August 17 2017, @07:44PM
FYI: Taxing robots will be problematic.
The definition of "robot" is flexible.
Is it one robot per job? No, it works multiple shifts. So 3 jobs for a robot cashier.
But what if 1 robot has 2 sensors, and so covers 2 checkout lines? Or if '1 robot' handles 30 checkout lines?
Or if you have an entire Amazon warehouse with 300 people that is replaced by '1 robot' that happens to have many manipulators?
I don't think it will work to have a "flat tax" per robot - you will probably have to get to a tax on the percentage of the value.
And how do you draw the line between "robot" and computer so you tax one but not the other?
Seems like the lines get fuzzy fast, particularly when you have people paid to look for loopholes and ways around paying the taxes.
It is going to be tricky, and a moving target to get it to be effective and to stay effective over time.
How would you do it?