FINALLY!!!

[peristaltor]

From the NYT, some sanity regarding the completely screwed-up tax laws that are contributing to our growing un- and underemployment problem.

We may not want to tax innovation, but there is no reason to subsidize investments that are designed merely to take away jobs. At the very least, a tax on robots would force businesses to think harder about when and where to deploy them.

This advance of technology into the work-place need not be relegated solely to the robots, as the article notes. Simply define "robot" more generally as a piece of technology that makes a job easier to do and you find that this has been a problem for decades, if not centuries. I may get deep into the weeds of this problem… later.

Comments

[peristaltor]

"One ringee-dingee. *Snort*"

—Ernestine the Operator

I've been reading way too much on related topics lately. Yes, it's true; telecommunications is just one of the industries that has benefited from tech, just like sock making and agriculture (though that last one is highly debatable, given the finished product).

I think there's a middle ground between "innovation" and displacement. I put The I Word in scare quotes because often changes in tech touted loudly as "improvements", especially lately, are highly debatable, if not outright Not There.

Back to your phone example. Yes, electronic switching has saved many ankles and knees from skating injuries. But has the wholesale mining of smart phone user data bettered the lives of those tracked and monitored and analyzed, simply that their personal data can be used against them for advertising purposes?

That same can be said for all the internet-connected household appliances you cited. Sure, your home thermostat can adjust the temp for you, saving money; it is also noting which rooms in your house you spend most of your time in, when you are at home regularly, what kind of activity happens when you are home, etc. Your fridge can order more milk or sugary beverages; it can also short-circuit the user's desire to lose weight by dunning with subtle hints that he is low on that soda he's vowing to curb for a while. Shoshana Zuboff notes mattresses (!) that monitor activity by time. Seriously, what the flying fuck!?

A modest cost to buying gadgetry, especially for industry, might instill some Come-To-Jeebus moments in what has become rampant surveillance disguised as Commerce That Will Set You Free.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that tech is all good or bad. I'm arguing here that the pace of tech adoption might be the only concern needing to be addressed. Right now, fire employee = profit, while buy gadget = profit. There is no middle ground… unless you count the ground currently slept on in ever greater numbers by former employees.