At the rate it’s going, robots could potentially take over more than 10% of the jobs that humans currently perform, and possibly even more in the not-too-distant future. For companies, this is a great development, as robots can perform tasks with high accuracy and consistency, without needing pay, training, or time off for illness. You simply program them, and they’re ready to go.
However, for humans, this trend is becoming increasingly concerning as it leads to job losses in manufacturing, automation, and various other sectors.
CBS’s ’60 Minutes’ recently aired an episode dedicated to this very topic: “Are robots taking our jobs?”
What can be done to discourage companies from increasingly replacing human labor with robots? How about a tax on companies using robots? Yes, you read that correctly, and this is coming from someone who generally opposes excessive taxation and government intervention in a free-market capitalist system. Let me explain how I could justify something as seemingly outrageous as a ‘robot tax.’
As more and more robots automate and take our jobs, we humans lose out in the long term. We lose well-paying jobs and are left with lower-paying positions that are often just slightly above the minimum wage. The government could tax companies based on the income generated by their use of robots. Just because robots are non-human doesn’t mean they should be exempt from taxation. Individuals and companies already pay taxes on assets like property and vehicles. Why not robots? Such a tax could fund future labor training on new technologies, helping workers transition and upskill for the new digital age. Remember, the government loses significant tax revenue when humans are replaced by robots. A tax on robots would help recoup some of that lost revenue. And even with this tax, companies would still likely find that using robots is more profitable than employing humans.
Some may argue that it doesn’t make sense and isn’t fair to tax something simply because it helps a company save money and give a company a technological advantage. True, but these savings come at the expense of hiring human beings to perform the job. Where does it end? When half of our jobs have been delegated to robots? As more jobs are eliminated by automation, society will see a decrease in tax revenue and income, which could negatively impact the economy in the long term.
If a tax isn’t a fair solution, how about the government placing a cap on the proportion of a company’s workforce that can be made up of robots? Again, this is coming from someone who believes in free enterprise and capitalism. But I believe there must be limits, and the government should play a role in ensuring that robots don’t automate every possible job, leaving humans out of work. In other words, just because a job can be done by a robot doesn’t mean it should be. Humans and robots can collaborate in certain roles.
Where does it end? Outsourcing, cyber-sourcing, robots—there are growing pressures on traditional labor, where there is less need for human workers and wages continue to decline. It’s understandable that this is part of the reality of the 21st century and the new digital age, but we must carefully navigate this transition. We need to bridge the gap and not trample on our most valuable resource—humans—in the pursuit of maximizing profits. At the end of the day, if humans don’t have well-paying jobs, companies won’t have enough customers, let alone the resources to invest in robots and automation.