It just seems silly to me that in a world where we have robots that can screw bolts on a car, and in a world where humans hate screwing bolts onto cars for 40 h

It just seems silly to me that in a world where we have robots that can screw bolts on a car, and in a world where humans hate screwing bolts onto cars for 40 hours a week, we would want to put a policy that makes the human the more attractive option (notwithstanding that it also raises costs and makes production less efficient). It feels very similar to the 'cutting grass with scissors' concept - why work in a less-productive way (i.e. ban lawnmowers) just to raise total employment, rather than work in the most productive way possible and then find alternative uses for the humans? Also the policy is only really useful if the number of humans outstrip the number of jobs available, but we haven't reached that point yet. You are right that clearly the corporation tax issues will have to be solved, that's a no-brainer.