
Driverless Trucks to Hit Alberta’s Oilsands - justonepost
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2015/06/driverless-truck-to-hit-albertas.html#sTWYpF5ihhk57RvP.99
======
slavik81
Fewer workers means less spent on wages, which means less contributed in
income taxes. These changes reduce government's profits while increasing the
oil company's profits.

The new NDP government promised as a part of their campaign to review royalty
rates. This seems like an argument that they'll need to increase even just to
keep revenue constant.

~~~
adventured
Canadian corporations pay taxes on their profits. They also distribute income
to shareholders, who then pay taxes. If they pay their execs rich salaries,
those execs pay rich taxes. All corporate profit eventually ends up in the
hands of an individual over time, and Canada has relatively high personal
income taxes.

It also varies by the country of course. Oil companies in the US pay among the
highest tax rates.

Exxon and Chevron for example typically pay 30%+ rates.

Last three years for Exxon:

Income before tax: $188 billion; Income tax expense: $73 billion; Net income:
$110 billion

Some of it is also double taxed, so the real tax rate is even higher than just
counting the corporate income tax.

~~~
anigbrowl
Not all shareholders live and pay taxes in the same place that the displaced
workers do. Also, rates of taxation on dividends and capital gains often
differ from those on wages, though I haven't looked up the specific rates in
Canada.

~~~
adventured
Dividends and long-term capital gains are mostly a form of double taxation.
That's why there is a strong argument for the rates not being as high as
traditional income.

~~~
anigbrowl
I'm no tax lawyer, but my understanding is that income trusts provide a way
around this, and this particular arrangement is available to Canadian firms:
[http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/deductdividendpay...](http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/deductdividendpayments.asp)

I'd like to believe that it all evens out in the end, but the reality seems to
be that many firms are able to avoid a lot of tax through a combination of
aggressive accounting and lobbying for either special tax treatment or
subsidies of one sort or another. I agree with you that robotic labor may well
fall subject to taxation and if so this will be why - many people don't feel
they're competing on a level playing field with the owners of capital.

------
ForHackernews
> “At an average (salary) of $200,000 per person, you can see the savings
> we’re going to get from an operations perspective.”

Wow, I guess I should've been a truck driver!

~~~
fizx
It's probably fully-loaded cost, so salary is 50-75% of that, but yes, doing a
temporary and undesirable job for a large company in some remote barren
location generally pays well.

~~~
enraged_camel
Yep. It's the exact same in Australian mining towns. High school graduates can
reliably get a job in the mines that pays north of $150k. The downside
obviously is that it's dangerous, not to mention bad for health. But some
people jump at the opportunity still.

------
ourmandave
Dammit, I love giant dump trucks.

Once they become driverless I can never look at them again without thinking of
_Maximum Overdrive_. =(

------
barney54
One interesting factoid--women are easier on these trucks better than man. At
least that's what the tour guide told me when I toured some of the oil sands a
couple years ago.

But even thought women are better than men by being easier on the trucks,
robots can be as gentle as possible. That is something that isn't discussed as
much--robotic control can be as fuel efficient as possible and as easy on
equipment as possible. Driverless trucks will not only save labor costs but
they will be better on the equipment.

------
bitmapbrother
If you're getting paid $200,000 to do drive a set route in a truck then you
deserve to be replaced by a robot. The justification for getting paid this
much for such a monotonous job is ridiculous. Their union better be sweating.

~~~
anigbrowl
Maybe, but look at those trucks, they're the size of a building. If you screw
up you could do a hell of a lot of damage. I presume the $200k salary is a
reflection of the supply & demand for that particular driving skill.

~~~
frozenport
None of the risk is bore by the truck driver. If they screw up or destroy the
equipment they might be sued for negligence, at worse. Risk of lives is
somewhat less compared to slamming a school bus into a busy intersection. It
is not clear if the risk is bore by the company because the equipment is
insured, maybe they will get higher insurance rates.

$200k salary comes from living the middle of nowhere, and indeed the work of
the unions.

The pay for this kind of a gig has gone up dramatically in the last 3 decades.
On the other hand, despite the 200k salary the the industry remains
profitable, as they simply stick their hands in the ground and pull out money.

~~~
anigbrowl
Your response is meaningless.

If I'm not willing to pay the going rate for a competent megatruck driver in a
remote location, and an incompetent driver wrecks a heap of equipment that
ends up costing me millions of dollars, then I may well ask myself why I
cheaped out instead of just spending $200k/year on a driver with the desired
skillset and experience.

I never suggested in any way that such wages were reflective of drivers' costs
of doing business or liability insurance, and don't know where you got such an
idea. I think the high salary is a function of both the remote location _and_
the particular skills/experience needed to operate a truck that can weigh up
to 600 tons when loaded. The trucks themselves cost a few million dollars
each, I believe.

~~~
frozenport
US miltary equipment, such as plains and tanks cost more and require more
experience. Its not about finding competant drivers.

~~~
anigbrowl
Working in the military isn't a regular job, and people who enlist in the
military sign a very restrictive contract, so the normal laws of supply and
demand don't apply. Internally the military is, by definition, a command-and-
control economy.

[http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/making-
commitment....](http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/making-
commitment.html)

