比爾·蓋茨：機器人應該像人一樣納稅

In a new interview with Quartz, Microsoft founder Bill Gates makes a rather stunning argument—that robots who replace human workers should incur taxes equivalent to that worker』s income taxes.

「Right now, the human worker who does, say, $50,000 worth of work in a factory, that income is taxed . . . If a robot comes in to do the same thing, you』d think that we』d tax the robot at a similar level.」

Gates argues that these taxes, paid by a robot's owners or makers, would be used to help fund labor force retraining. Former factory workers, drivers, and cashiers would be transitioned to health services, education, or other fields where human workers will remain vital. Gates even suggests the policy would intentionally 「slow down the speed of that adoption [of automation] somewhat,」 giving more time to manage the broader transition.

The idea of what amounts to a tax on efficiency would seem anathema to much conventional economic wisdom. For decades, the dominant line on automation has been that displaced workers shift into more productive roles, in turn growing the total economy.

But that thesis has begun to show cracks—as Gates puts it, 「people are saying that the arrival of that robot is a net loss,」 demanding greater active engagement with job retraining and other programs that target impacted communities. (Though the effectiveness of job training programs is still somewhat debatable).

While Gates resolutely comes down in favor of government』s role in managing automation』s impacts, he offers two points that should be at least slightly compelling to free marketeers.

First, Gates says, the impact of robotics and artificial intelligence in the next 20 years will be a much more concentrated version of the steady, incremental displacement that was common throughout the 20th century. The market alone won』t be able to deal with the speed of that transition—and, Gates further suggests, much of the potential for putting free labor to better use will be in the public sector.

Second, and probably even more importantly, Gates says automation won't be allowed to thrive if the public resists it. 「It is really bad if people overall have more fear about what innovation is going to do than they have enthusiasm . . . And, you know, taxation is certainly a better way to handle it than just banning some elements of it.」

In other words, Gates believes that if automation doesn't clearly benefit all members of society, it could generate some sort of neo-Luddite movement that would restrain technology much more severely than any tax.

If you don』t believe him, just look around. The widespread belief that globalization』s benefits were poorly or unfairly managed has led directly to a political resurgence for fans of walls and tariffs. The same dynamic could repeat itself if automation isn't rolled out wisely.

在最近接受Quartz採訪時，微軟創始人比爾·蓋茨發表了一番驚人言論：搶走人類工作的機器人，應該按與工人所得稅相等的金額納稅。

「現在，人類工人在工廠里工作，比如說他創造了5萬美元的價值，這筆收入會被徵稅……如果一個機器人來做同樣的工作，你可能會認為我們應該按類似的水平對機器人徵稅。」

蓋茨稱，這筆稅費將由機器人的所有者或製造者支付，用於資助勞動力再培訓。原有的工廠工人、司機和收銀員將進入醫療服務、教育或人類工人的作用依舊非常重要的其他領域。蓋茨甚至建議，政策應該有意識地「放緩採用[自動化]的速度」，以提供更多的時間來管理更大範圍的轉變。

許多傳統經濟理論或許會對這種相當於對效率徵稅的觀點深惡痛絕。數十年來，關於自動化的主流觀點是，被機器人取代的工人將轉移到生產率更高的崗位，進而帶動整體經濟的增長。

但這種觀點已經開始出現漏洞——正如蓋茨所說：「人們說機器人的到來是一種凈損耗」，需要更積極地投入就業再培訓和其他面向受影響社區的項目。（但就業培訓項目的效果依舊值得商榷。）

雖然蓋茨堅決支持政府在管理自動化的影響方面發揮作用，但他提出的兩條建議，對於自由市場主義者至少應該有一定的吸引力。

首先，蓋茨指出，未來20年，機器人和人工智慧的影響，將是整個20世紀普遍存在的穩定的增量位移更為集中的版本。僅靠市場無法應對轉變的速度，所以蓋茨進一步認為，要將自由勞動力投入更好的使用，公共部門具有較大的潛力。

第二點，或許也是更重要的一點是，蓋茨認為，如果遭到公眾的抵制，自動化將無法順利發展。「如果對於創新帶來的結果，人類的擔憂大於熱情，這將是非常糟糕的……而相比只是禁止其中的個別要素，納稅絕對是解決這個問題更好的辦法。」

換言之，蓋茨認為，如果自動化無法讓全體社會成員明顯受益，可能會誕生某種新型的盧德運動，技術因此受到的限制將遠遠超過稅收所帶來的影響。

如果不相信，不妨看看我們周圍的情況。目前正在蔓延的一種觀點是，全球化帶來的好處並沒有得到良好或是公正的管理，這直接導致了支持建牆和提高關稅的政治勢力的復興。如果不能明智地解決自動化的影響，這種情況或將在未來重現。（財富中文網）

譯者：劉進龍/汪皓