Money for Nothing? The Bold Future of Universal Basic Income Explained
In the third part of Andrew Yang’s book, “The War on Normal People,” he explores the transformative idea of Universal Basic Income (UBI) as a response to the challenges posed by automation and artificial intelligence. Yang presents UBI not just as a financial safety net, but as a foundation for a future where technology enhances our lives rather than displaces our labor.
In our time, as machines begin to do the work of men, we stand at a crossroads. We’re faced with big questions about what work means and how we organize our lives around it. There’s a bold idea on the table: Universal Basic Income (UBI). This plan would give every American between 18 and 64 years old a set sum of money each year, $12,000, to be precise. It’s not just about softening the blow of lost jobs. It’s about asking what value and purpose look like when work changes.
In a future where wealthy nations like the USA embrace Universal Basic Income (UBI) as a response to automation’s relentless march, the world will find itself at a peculiar crossroads. The ripple effects of such a policy would extend far beyond the borders of the initiating country, touching every corner of the globe in profound and varied ways. For countries less affluent, the introduction of UBI in a powerhouse economy could serve as both a beacon of hope and a source of economic upheaval. The increased consumer spending and demand for imported goods in wealthier nations could buoy the economies of these poorer countries, yet the specter of dependency and the challenges of competing in a rapidly evolving global market loom large.
The social and political fabric of these nations could witness significant shifts as well. The success of UBI in developed countries might inspire similar initiatives elsewhere, sparking a global reevaluation of social safety nets and economic policies. However, the path to implementing such policies in less wealthy nations is fraught with obstacles, not least of which is the financial viability of such programs. Moreover, the potential changes in global migration patterns, with people seeking better lives in countries offering UBI, could lead to brain drain in poorer countries, further complicating their developmental trajectories.
Yet, amidst these challenges lies the opportunity for innovation and adaptation. The necessity to forge new economic paths in the face of automation and the example set by UBI in wealthier nations could spur poorer countries to leapfrog to new technologies and sustainable practices. This future scenario demands a global dialogue focused on cooperation, aiming to ensure that the benefits of technological advancements and policies like UBI are shared equitably across the world.
Realistically, the implementation of UBI in richer countries could widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots on a global scale. Wealthier nations, with their resources and technological advancements, might navigate the transition to automation with relative ease, cushioning their populations against economic displacement. In contrast, poorer countries, already struggling with economic instability and limited resources, may find themselves further marginalized. The economic benefits of increased consumer spending in UBI-implementing countries could indeed spill over to these nations, but the benefits are likely to be uneven, favoring those with established trade ties and the capacity to meet increased demand.
Moreover, the global dialogue on adapting to automation and considering policies like UBI may continue to be dominated by the voices of the wealthy, with the needs and realities of poorer nations sidelined. While the ideal scenario would see a world united in addressing the challenges posed by automation, fostering innovation, and sharing prosperity, the likely scenario is one of continued division and inequality.
Nations will navigate these changes in isolation, guarding their own interests, with international cooperation taking a back seat. The dream of a global community moving in lockstep towards a future of shared prosperity and technological harmony remains just that — a dream, challenged by the realities of international politics and economic disparities.
The 20th century witnessed a remarkable narrative of economic transformation, where numerous nations once mired in poverty managed to lift themselves into prosperity. This era of change was fueled by industrialization, globalization, and the spread of technology, alongside significant investments in education and health. Countries that were predominantly agricultural economies saw rapid urbanization and development, as manufacturing and services became the backbone of their economic growth. The global order, despite its imperfections, facilitated a degree of economic integration that allowed these nations to participate in and benefit from international trade and investment.
Contrastingly, the challenges facing poor nations in the 21st century are of a different nature and magnitude, largely due to the accelerating pace of automation and digital transformation. While the previous century’s economic leap was powered by human labor moving from farms to factories, the current era is defined by the replacement of human labor with machines, particularly in sectors that have historically been the stepping stones for developing economies. The automation of manufacturing and services threatens to bypass the traditional path to development, leaving countries with fewer options to integrate into the global economy in a meaningful way.
Moreover, the digital divide exacerbates these challenges, as access to the latest technologies, high-speed internet, and digital literacy becomes increasingly essential for economic participation. The rapid pace of change means that adapting to the new economic landscape requires not just investment in physical infrastructure but also in human capital, with a focus on education systems that can prepare populations for a future where critical thinking, creativity, and technological fluency are paramount. The 21st century presents a paradox where the very technologies that offer immense potential for improving human life also risk widening the gap between rich and poor nations.
Critics of UBI often argue that it could discourage work, lead to economic inefficiency, or become financially unsustainable. They worry that providing people with money for “doing nothing” could undermine the work ethic that underpins society. However, Yang, alongside numerous proponents, counters these arguments by pointing to the unprecedented changes AI and automation are bringing to the job market.
Traditional jobs are disappearing at a rate that the economy and education system can’t keep up with, making the old arguments against UBI less relevant. The reality is that AI’s impact on the workforce could leave many without the means to live, through no fault of their own. In this context, UBI is seen not as a disincentive to work, but as a necessary adaptation to a world where the nature of work itself is fundamentally changing. It’s about providing stability and security in a rapidly evolving job landscape, ensuring that the benefits of technological advancements are shared by all, rather than a select few.
UBI is more than numbers and policies. It’s about how we see each other in a world where machines can do much of our work. What place do we have when not everyone needs to work to keep the world running?
The good that could come from UBI is wide-ranging. It could lift people out of poverty, spark new businesses, and give people the freedom to change careers or take time to learn new skills. It could make our lives less stressful, reduce crime, and keep the wheels of the economy turning even as jobs evolve.
The idea is to pay for UBI with a new kind of tax that takes a small slice from the wealth created by machines and technology. This way, the benefits of automation don’t just go to the few but are shared by everyone. Most of this money would be spent locally, flowing back into the economy.
This isn’t a new idea. In the past, experiments have shown that giving people money without strings attached doesn’t make them work less. Instead, it improves health, education, and well-being. From a small town in Canada to the oil fields of Alaska, these experiments have shown that a basic income can work.
But the challenge we face isn’t just about money. It’s about finding meaning and joy in a world where the old ways of working and living are changing. UBI could help us explore new ways to find fulfillment beyond our jobs.
Imagine a future where people are free to create, learn, and help their communities because they’re not worried about making ends meet. This isn’t just about surviving in a world run by machines. It’s about thriving, finding new ways to live well together.
As we look ahead, the idea of UBI offers a path to a world where technology frees us to live better lives. It’s a vision of a future where we all share in the wealth of our collective creativity and invention, where everyone has the chance to seek happiness and fulfillment. In the face of change, it’s a promise of stability and hope, a way to ensure that progress benefits us all.
