He says "you'd think we'd tax the robot at a similar level." And if you think about it, it does make a lot of sense. Robots will be depriving humans of work, so to support those humans the company deploying them will continue to pay tax for their employment, this will then be used as a way to support the rest of society.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmorris/2017/02/17/tax-the-robots-says-bill-gates/#136de6814ada

The Archdruid has been saying the same thing for years already.

It makes perfect sense.

>It makes perfect sense.

Yeah, every job replaced is one less personal income tax collected, I think it is only fair to shift the burden to the corporation instead of squeezing the ever shrinking work (in terms of percentage of GDP) for the tax burden.

>It makes perfect sense.

In a perfect world. In the real world, the corp is going to either shift the robot to a non-taxed location or add the tax to the cost of production. 

>add the tax to the cost of production. 

Better than a "universal income" IMFO