Exploring Universal Basic Income in an AI-Driven Age: Economic Security or Power Dynamics?
by Melissa Carleton
It's 2026, and as new AI tools seem to emerge every week while unemployment ticks up, some may ask: are we headed toward a Universal Basic Income scheme?
As more and more tasks become automated, from data analytics to summarizing reports and beyond, almost every person I've spoken to lives with a lingering fear that AI could replace their job. Without a job, a person must find an alternative way to pay their living expenses.
Enter the idea of Universal Basic Income (UBI). Under a UBI arrangement, each individual receives a minimum fixed payment, supposedly allowing them to live without earning an income from a job.
The idea gained popularity in 2020 when presidential candidate Andrew Yang popularized the idea as a way to secure basic economic security for everyone. Although AI disruption was not as widespread at the time, it has spurred a comeback of Yang's initial proposal.
In this article, I explore the dialogue surrounding the concept in an AI-driven era. As with most hypothetical social structures, it's hard to predict the likelihood of such a reality occurring in our lifetime. However, regardless of this likelihood, we should seriously consider the fact that it could create power dynamics that we don't intend, instead of its more noble intention of securing a livable future for everyone.
I started thinking seriously about the possibility of a UBI scheme a few months ago when I came across a video by one of my favorite content creators, Marina Mogliko, on one of her YouTube channels called Silicon Valley Girl. She interviewed Reid Hoffman, CEO of LinkedIn, on how to get ahead while others are losing their jobs.
Mogliko is an entrepreneur and English language educator, and on this YouTube channel of hers (among several), she films content relating to her life in Silicon Valley and the landscape surrounding the tech world and entrepreneurship.
She opens the video by asking Hoffman if he thinks we’ll come to a world where we don’t need many people working. Hoffman responds that he believes it’s possible within our lifetime.
Mogliko then predicts that some people will work and others “will just enjoy life.” Hoffman suggests that if enough robots produce everything, that could happen. However, he then states that some individuals are competitive and will want to work hard. These individuals will desire a differential reward for their hard work and will therefore not receive the minimum UBI, while others do.
Mogliko then acknowledged that having a purpose through work can be important for longevity. Her comment likely alludes to the Japanese concept of Ikigai, referring to the aspects of life that create continuity, passion, and meaning.
The philosophy of Ikigai does not imply that everyone derives meaning from paid work. However, it is often referred to when explaining why older adults in Okinawa, Japan, deemed a “blue zone,” live so long. They don’t really “retire” in the western sense and often continue part-time and self-chosen work. This lifestyle may contribute to their longevity.
I enjoy Mogliko’s content and found value in Hoffman and Mogliko’s suggestions for how to get ahead in an AI-driven world. However, I also believe that they understated the potential consequences of a universal basic income scheme. In particular, they did not address how a UBI scheme in an AI-driven era could shift power dynamics in society for the worse.
A Tiny Ruling Elite as AI Architects
Today’s labor market statistics are alarming. The unemployment rate for recent college graduates was over 9% in December 2025. Some forecasts project that it will reach 25% in the near future.
But it’s not only recent college graduates who are bearing the brunt of an AI-driven labor market. In 2025, several tech companies cut thousands of corporate jobs.
According to a Wall Street Journal survey published in October 2025, only 20% of workers reported confidence in their ability to find a job today. The article features an anecdote of an executive who has one person manage clusters of AI agents that code instead of hiring people to code.
These stories can lead anyone to wonder whether society will experience a complete dystopian twist where AI runs itself. But before the situation becomes that extreme, at least a few remaining people working will be required to run all the AI agents.
In their video, Mogliko and Hoffman do not fully address who will be the ones working; that is, running the AI agents, if we reach a UBI era. Hoffman hypothesizes that some people are naturally competitive and will want to work in order to earn a differential income.
However, my opinion is that the word “competitive” could function as a euphemism referring to those who are already privileged, wealthy, and well-connected, even if Hoffman did not intend it so. It could foreshadow a society divided into two groups: those who earn a universal basic income and those who earn an outsized income and architect the systems that govern everyone else.
Systems weave the entire fabric of society. Who qualifies for a mortgage? How are credit scores determined? What does our educational system teach? If only a select few work to create this system and everyone else receives a UBI, this powerful elite would engineer the rules of society while everyone else gets swept up in their whims.
I've laid out the quantitative metrics and technological shifts that lead some to speculate we're headed towards a UBI-based society. One may ask how this idea has played out in popular imagination, including in novels.
Universal Basic Income Societies in Novels
Authors have toyed with the idea of a universal basic income long before today’s AI era. In 1967, author Philip José Farmer wrote the sci-fi classic, “Riders of the Purple Wage.” In the society Farmer constructs, every person receives a basic income called a “purple wage.”
In this society, social norms erode, as work is no longer an expectation. As a result, citizens take little responsibility for their choices. Although Farmer does not present a UBI as necessarily bad, he aims to capture the social erosion that can occur with the rise of mass consumerism that marked the 1960s.
Another fictional novel, Manna, published in 2003 by Marshall Brain, paints a dystopian future where an advanced AI manages all aspects of the economy, from micro-managing employees to predicting consumer needs.
As an economist, I can’t help but think that Brain’s world is similar to thousands of AI economists operating at warp speed. I’ve always found economic analysis powerful for its ability to predict traffic flows, demand, and much more. I’m already impressed with the potential of economic tools when leveraged by one individual. With AI solving economic problems at warp speed, the outcome turns from powerful to scary.
I believe that Brain’s version of a techno-dystopia comes closer to today’s reality than Farmer’s. In particular, Farmer speaks to fears of social erosion from mass consumerism, leading individuals to voluntarily decide not to work. Conversely, many of today’s working-age individuals in an AI-driven labor market would do anything to find work and prove that AI cannot replace them.
All this said, I predict that the next several years will bring more techno-dystopian novels centered around the social implications of AI disrupting work.
How Likely is a Universal Basic Income Economy?
Whenever society undergoes a major economic, social, or technological shift, authors experience sparks of inspiration that manifest in intriguing novels. Scholars and public intellectuals conjure up predictions of what such societies would look like or if and when they’ll become reality.
In this article, I do not attempt to predict how likely we are to experience a UBI scheme in our lifetimes due to AI disruption or other factors.
Instead, I hope readers reflect on how social structures emerging from a UBI scheme could further concentrate power in the hands of the already wealthy. If most individuals earn a small fixed income not working, a few can reap outside rewards by controlling the systems that govern the masses.
Sources:
Acemoglu, Daron and Pascual Restrepo. “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Labor Market.” Oxford Open Economics 3, Supplement 1 (2024). https://academic.oup.com/ooec/article/3/Supplement_1/i906/7708121.
Acemoglu, Daron, and Pascual Restrepo. “Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 33, no. 2 (Spring 2019): 3–30. https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.33.2.3.
Brain, Marshall. Manna: Two Views of Humanity’s Future. MarshallBrain.com. https://marshallbrain.com/manna1.
Ellis, Lindsay, Owen Tucker-Smith, and Allison Pohle. “Tens of Thousands of White-Collar Jobs Are Disappearing as AI Starts to Bite.” Wall Street Journal, October 28, 2025. https://www.wsj.com/economy/jobs/white-collar-jobs-ai-324b749c
Farmer, Philip José. “Riders of the Purple Wage.” Classics of Science Fiction, May 26, 2024. https://classicsofsciencefiction.com/2024/05/26/riders-of-the-purple-wage-by-philip-jose-farmer/.
Miller, Katharine. “Radical Proposal: Universal Basic Income to Offset Job Losses Due to Automation.” Stanford Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI), October 20, 2021. https://hai.stanford.edu/news/radical-proposal-universal-basic-income-offset-job-losses-due-automation.
Mogilko, Marina (Silicon Valley Girl), and Reid Hoffman. “LinkedIn Founder: How to Get Ahead While Others Lose Their Jobs.” YouTube, Silicon Valley Girl YouTube Channel, February 27, 2025. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE1AjTnsubI.
Porter, Eduardo. “Universal Basic Income, AI and the Future of Work: Andrew Yang’s Case.” The Guardian, December 15, 2025.https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/dec/15/universal-basic-income-ai-andrew-yang.