How should governments formulate policies to address the issue of mass unemployment caused by humanoid robots?

Okay, regarding this issue, we can imagine it as a massive societal transformation project, rather than simply addressing symptoms in isolation. If I were a policymaker, I would systematically consider and plan from the following aspects.

I. Major Upgrade of the Education System: Don't Teach What Robots Can Do; Teach What Robots Can't

Robots excel at repetitive tasks with clear rules and processes. Therefore, our education can no longer primarily aim to cultivate "skilled laborers."

• Shift towards "Soft Skills" Development: Future education should focus on fostering abilities that robots cannot replicate, such as:

  • Creativity and Imagination: Arts, design, scientific discovery, etc.
  • Critical Thinking and Complex Problem-Solving Skills: Analyzing information, making judgments, solving problems without standard answers.
  • Emotional Intelligence and Collaborative Communication Skills: Understanding others, teamwork, providing emotional support.

• Promote "Lifelong Learning": Technology iterates too quickly; expecting a single degree to last a lifetime is no longer realistic. The government should heavily invest in and subsidize adult education, online courses, and vocational retraining programs, allowing a 40-year-old truck driver, for example, to become a drone maintenance engineer or a travel experience designer through learning. This needs to become a new "educational infrastructure," much like building highways.

II. Weaving a Broader Safety Net: Let's Talk About Universal Basic Income (UBI)

When a large number of jobs disappear, traditional unemployment insurance may no longer suffice. This is where a bolder idea emerges: Universal Basic Income (UBI).

• What it is: Simply put, the government regularly gives every citizen a sum of money—not a lot, but enough to cover basic living expenses (food, housing, etc.), with no strings attached.
• Why:
  1. Safety Net: Ensures that everyone can live with dignity even after losing their job, preventing social unrest.
  2. Encouragement: With basic security, people have more confidence to try entrepreneurship, engage in low-income but meaningful public welfare initiatives, or pursue longer periods of re-education.
• Controversy: This idea is highly controversial, mainly focusing on two points: "Where will the money come from?" and "Will it foster idleness?" This needs to be considered in conjunction with the tax reform discussed below.

III. Making Robots "Pay Taxes" Too: Redesigning the Tax System

This is key to solving "where the money will come from." Since robots are replacing human labor, the source of taxation should shift from "people" to "robots" (or rather, the capital that owns the robots).

• Robot Tax / Automation Tax: A tax could be levied on enterprises for purchasing and using robots, or a higher tax could be imposed on excess profits gained through automation. This money could then serve as the primary source for the UBI or social security funds mentioned above.
• Capital Gains Tax Reform: In the future, wealth will be increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few who own technology and capital. The government needs to raise the tax rate on capital gains (e.g., stock, real estate investment income) to balance wealth disparity.

In essence, this means allowing the immense wealth generated by technological progress to be more equitably distributed throughout society through the tool of "secondary distribution" via taxation, rather than just enriching a small minority.

IV. Encouraging New Jobs: Vigorously Developing "Human-Touch" Industries

The government should, like its support for new energy vehicles, use policies and funds to guide and support industries where "robots don't do well, but humans do."

• "Care Economy": Such as elder care services, psychological counseling, childcare, and rehabilitation therapy. These jobs require deep emotional interaction and personalized care, which robots find difficult to perform.
• "Experience Economy": Such as customized tourism, cultural and creative industries, handicrafts, and immersive entertainment. People will be more willing to pay for unique, human-centric experiences.
• "Creative Economy": Research, art, content creation, etc.

The government can encourage more people to venture into these fields for entrepreneurship and employment through tax breaks, providing venues, and simplifying approvals.

V. Reducing Working Hours, Sharing the Dividends of Technology

Given the high productivity of robots, why should we still work 5 days a week, 8 hours a day?

• Promote a 4-Day Work Week: The government could first pilot this in the public sector and state-owned enterprises, then encourage private companies to follow suit through tax incentives and other means.
• Benefits:
  1. Job Creation: The same total amount of work would require more people to complete, indirectly "sharing" job opportunities.
  2. Improved Quality of Life: People would have more time for learning, spending time with family, consumption, and entertainment, which in turn can boost the "experience economy."
  3. Foster Innovation: More leisure time could potentially spark greater creativity.

In Summary

This is by no means an easy task; it requires immense foresight and courage from the government. These five points are interconnected:

Education cultivates talent adapted to the future -> Taxation collects money from technological dividends -> This money supports the social safety net -> Simultaneously encourages new industries to create new jobs -> Finally, shortening working hours allows everyone to share the fruits of technological progress.

This process will not be achieved overnight; it will likely involve "crossing the river by feeling the stones," with small-scale pilot programs in different regions, constantly adjusting and optimizing. The key is to start thinking and acting now.