Welcome to Tech, Actually. A newsletter about power, systems, and the weird stuff we keep believing about technology. Whether it’s AI, platform capitalism, or digital policy that somehow just appeared without a vote, this is where tech runs into politics.
If you're not subscribed yet this newsletter delivers mildly opinionated thoughts, links you might’ve missed, interviews with people who are way smarter than me and the occasional rant from someone who used to believe tech would save the world.
This time, we’re talking about Universal Basic Income. It sounds progressive, feels generous, and makes Silicon Valley CEOs feel very clever. But what if it’s not a solution but just a well-branded distraction funded by the people who broke the system in the first place? Without further ado, let’s get into it.
Sam Altman thinks he has a plan.
The CEO of OpenAI, one of the most powerful figures shaping the next economy, has long been an advocate for Universal Basic Income. In fact, he helped fund one of the largest UBI trials in the U.S., giving participants $1,000 a month over multiple years. When asked about the motivation, Altman made it clear: “My view is that AI will generate enough wealth for everyone to have what they need. The question is just how it gets distributed. (Opens in a new window)”
Elon Musk has echoed that sentiment, famously predicting that UBI is inevitable. “There’s a pretty good chance we’ll end up with a universal basic income, or something like that, due to automation. I’m not sure what else one would do. (Opens in a new window)” In more recent interviews, he’s even gone further: “In a benign scenario… none of us will have a job.… But... there will be universal high income, not universal basic income. (Opens in a new window)”
From their vantage point, the future is already clear. Automation, especially through artificial intelligence, will upend the labor market. Millions of jobs — truck driving, copywriting, legal review, accounting — are at risk. Faced with this looming disruption, the tech elite is trying to pre-empt the fallout with a seductive offer: basic income for all, funded by the fruits of automation. No work, no problem.
But while this sounds generous, almost utopian, it conceals a much more convenient truth for them. Universal Basic Income, as proposed by many in Silicon Valley, doesn’t challenge the structure that creates inequality. It simply pays you to accept it.
They like UBI because it solves just enough to stop people from asking harder questions.
Instead of confronting the consequences of concentrated ownership, monopolistic platforms, and the erosion of public infrastructure, UBI wraps a complex crisis in a monthly direct deposit. A system that extracts value from every click, swipe, and gig-task offers you cash in return. But nothing structural. You get €1,200. They keep everything else.
Altman’s trial showed some improvements in mental health and financial stress, but it didn’t move the needle on housing, employment, or security. The payouts helped people survive, but not thrive. Even Altman’s own phrasing reveals the limits of the vision: “basic compute” and “basic income” as rations, doled out from above, never debated, never collectively shaped.
There’s a growing body of left-progressive criticism that cuts through this. As sociologist James Foley writes, UBI offers “a post-political shortcut. (Opens in a new window)” It is a way to appear radical without any of the messiness of actual redistribution. It removes the need to organize, to bargain, to legislate structural change. It turns social justice into software.
The concern isn’t theoretical. Many UBI proposals come hand in hand with plans to reduce or even eliminate public services. In this vision, healthcare, childcare, and education are no longer rights. They become products. If you want them, use your basic income to buy them. If you can’t afford them, well, that’s not the system’s problem. As one 2020 report by Public Services International warned, “UBI without robust public services becomes a neoliberal paradise.”
And then there’s the math. A meaningful UBI — say, $2,000 per month — is prohibitively expensive in most current budget models unless paired with heavy taxation on wealth, capital gains, or corporate profits. Notably, this is something many UBI proponents do not propose. What remains is the worst of both worlds: a watered-down stipend that fails to lift people out of poverty, while justifying the rollback of existing services. A monthly check that can’t even cover rent in Berlin or San Francisco.
Anything under $2,000 per month is just a tech-funded distraction.
And this distraction has political consequences. It pacifies. It individualizes. It encourages the idea that capitalism’s worst outcomes can be patched over with cash. No need to talk about power, ownership, or class.
What would a better future look like? One that doesn’t rely on handouts from our self-appointed digital landlords?
It starts by refusing the premise that automation must lead to mass unemployment. Technology doesn’t destroy jobs. It transforms them. The real question is: who owns the tools, who sets the rules, and who benefits? If AI is going to increase productivity, why not shorten the workweek? If tech profits are surging, why not tax them meaningfully and reinvest in public infrastructure?
A progressive future won’t be built on passive income. It will be built on collective ownership, universal services, labor rights, and democratic control over digital infrastructure. UBI isn’t a bad idea because it gives people money. It becomes a bad idea when it replaces everything else. When it turns into a substitute for justice, not a tool in service of it.
To be clear, the desire for a more humane system is real. People are exhausted. Wages stagnate, rents soar, burnout is everywhere. UBI feels like relief. But we shouldn’t confuse relief with repair. We don’t need monthly hush money. We need systems that work. For everyone.
And we shouldn’t outsource the future of justice to the people who built the problem in the first place.
Liked this piece?
Send it to a friend who still thinks UBI is the future. Or to that one tech bro in your life. You know the one.
You can also find me on LinkedIn (Opens in a new window) or Instagram (Opens in a new window), where I try to make sense of tech, power, and all the strange things we now call “innovation.”
Oh, and: my book Broligarchy (Opens in a new window) is coming out soon in Germany. It’s a mix of personal stories, tech-industry deep dives, and probably a few opinions I’ll regret later.
Would love if you kept an eye out for it.
Thanks for reading, as always – Aya
Date
August 4, 2025