Abstract

A recent political proposal to address the challenge of technological unemployment suggests that the state should impose a tax on labor-replacing technologies. The idea is to preserve jobs by disincentivizing automation. In this article, I critically assess the proposal from an ethical perspective. I show that, with respect to conceptions of distributive justice, it is unclear that precluding consumers’ potential real-income gains from automation can be justified. But foremost, I examine the moral ideal behind the normative claim to preserve labor. I show that the arguments in favor of a robot tax rely on doubtful moral convictions on the value of work and I conclude that a moral basis for imposing a robot tax is subject to justified scrutiny.

Highlights

  • Distinguished economists have argued that the number of jobs could soon be taken over by artificial intelligence AI [1]

  • The group of taxpayers is almost identical to the group composed of consumers. Those who object to RT because it increases consumers prices would have to object to a redistributive scheme that leads to an increase in taxes

  • I will outline different ideas to support of securing labor that conceive of work as a constitutive part of the good life

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Distinguished economists have argued that the number of jobs could soon be taken over by artificial intelligence AI [1]. The proposal is hotly debated in the public Illustrious entrepreneurs, such as Bill Gates, opted for the idea of RT: “The robot that takes your job should pay taxes.” [13]. In "Distributive policies and the value of work", I take a step back and ask whether it is desirable at all to protect employment from automation, and outline a prominent argument for this protection, which relies on the assumption of an intrinsic value of work. I will show that the normative assumption of a value of work does not necessarily hold for the future

Robot taxes and economic costs
Some considerations of justice
Egalitarian justice
Priority and sufficiency
Harm and desert
Distributive policies and the value of work
Work and the good life
Critique
Conclusion
OECD: ICTs and Jobs
11. Reuters
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call