Does it make sense to distribute part of taxes received from a tax money, generated by the use of robots, to the citizens, so they can buy stock of companies and become co-owners and beneficiaries of robotic economy, using modelling to calculate the input of robotics, and advantage of increased tax collection as a result of booming robotic economy?

The idea of distributing part of taxes from the use of robots to citizens, allowing them to buy stock in companies utilizing robotics and become co-owners and beneficiaries of the resulting economic growth, has some potential benefits and challenges, as outlined below:

 

Arguments in favor:

 

    Sharing the wealth generated by automation: As robotics and AI become more prevalent and potentially lead to increased corporate profits, this approach could ensure that the benefits are shared more broadly among the population, rather than primarily benefiting capital owners.

    Citizen ownership and engagement: Direct stock ownership can foster a sense of shared ownership and engagement in the economy, potentially leading to greater understanding and support for technological advancements.

    Potential to address inequality: If automation contributes to widening income inequality, distributing stock ownership could help mitigate this issue by providing citizens with a second income stream from capital.

    Maintaining government revenue: As automation may shift the tax base from labor to capital, increasing taxes on capital (potentially through a "robot tax" or other methods) could be necessary to maintain government revenue. This revenue could then be used to fund the stock distribution program.

    Economic stimulus: Increased income from stock dividends could stimulate the economy through increased consumer spending.

 

Challenges and considerations:

 

    Complexity and logistics: Implementing a system to collect taxes based on robotics use and distribute stock ownership to all citizens would be complex. Defining what constitutes a taxable robot and determining the appropriate tax rates would be challenging.

    Defining and measuring the "input of robotics": Developing a reliable model to quantify the economic contribution of robotics and determine how to allocate taxes based on this contribution would be difficult.

    Alternative approaches: Other methods of addressing the potential negative impacts of automation, such as strengthening social safety nets, investing in education and skills training, and promoting entrepreneurship, should also be considered.

    Financial sustainability: Ensuring the financial sustainability of a program to distribute stock ownership, particularly in terms of funding mechanisms and long-term costs, would be crucial.

    Risk of reducing work incentives: Some critics argue that guaranteed income or significant unearned income from capital ownership could reduce individuals' motivation to work. 

 

If no work places are left, being an owner is a good, meaningful, life.

 

In summary, the concept presents an innovative approach to sharing the benefits of automation and addressing potential economic inequality. However, it's essential to carefully consider the potential challenges and weigh them against the proposed benefits. Further research and modeling would be necessary to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of such a program.