Ultimately, this recurring attack on technology and economic growth is nothing more than an attempt by an elite to protect the status quo of certain obsolete sectors. But the third point is the most shameful: the absolute incoherence of the union's demands. As the great liberal economist Frédéric Bastiat taught, technical progress is precisely about getting the forces of nature or machines to do the work, requiring less and less human effort to achieve the same result. Economic science is irrefutable on this point: only a massive increase in productivity through the accumulation of capital and technology can sustain higher wages by working fewer hours. The UGT demands, on one hand, a reduction of the working week to 32 hours, but, on the other, seeks to penalize and block the use of the capital tools (AI and robotics) that would make such an advance possible. Its sole purpose is to grant the State a blank check and a moral excuse to fiscally plunder any new technological tool. Secondly, we face a new Luddite outbreak that acts as a deliberate brake on progress. These proposals are empty shells, without clear technical definitions. The state-supported unionism does not seek the emancipation of the worker, but to perpetuate their dependence on the political machine. Just as the Luddites of the 19th century destroyed mechanical looms, today's unionists seek to make technology more expensive through confiscatory taxes and limit its implementation through 'ethical' regulations written by bureaucrats. However, the union Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT) has launched a proposal that seems taken from the darkest times: to create a 'robot tax' and approve an 'ethical regulation' of AI. We are facing a new Luddite assault that, if it organizes and internationalizes, threatens to halt the productive progress of the entire world. Genuine improvements in our standard of living will never come from 'ethical' regulations designed by politicians who do not understand innovation, the free market, or the spontaneous order. If we allow state coercion and union fear to dictate our technological development, we will be sabotaging our own future and voluntarily embracing misery. The author is an independent analyst. From Spain comes news that, if it were not so destructive for the economic future, would frankly be comical. What exactly constitutes a 'robot' for tax purposes? This happens because when States find opportunities to legitimize their bad decisions through bad decisions made by other States, they tend to simply point out that 'X' is customary in the world, thus supposedly lessening the burden of responsibility on the executive politician who brings society to a bad future at a given time. Historically, detractors of the free market have suffered from what libertarian theory calls 'automation hysteria': the irrational belief that technology will generate massive, permanent unemployment that only coercive state intervention and socialism can solve. Where does AI begin and where does the software of a basic computer end? It is total blindness to demand the direct benefits of productivity while penalizing the machines that generate it! Panamanians, we must observe this European absurdity with caution. The UGT's demand must be dismantled praxeologically, as it is based on three serious errors. Firstly, the absolute ambiguity of the measure stands out. In the face of a historical stagnation in its productivity, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics represents a vital opportunity for the European nation to reverse this decline.
