Attention!
Who gets to define the narrative of guaranteed income?
A dystopian term is increasingly being used in well-heeled tech circles. “Silicon Valley Is Bracing for a Permanent Underclass”, writes tech culture chronicler Jasmine Sun for New York Times Opinion.
Excuse me, bracing for a what?
The concept is roughly this: the advent of AI heralds such a technological transformation that will reorganize our economy into those who have–because they make money from AI systems they control–and those who have not, a permanent underclass with no job opportunities and no income, because of AI replacement.
The threat of an AI-induced mass poverty has brought much attention to the guaranteed income movement. Attention is good. But it has turned the question of poverty into a tech issue, centering the already extremely loud voices of the tech robber-barons in policy discussions where they have no expertise.
This is borne out in the press. The narrative about whether or not guaranteed income fundamentally works has been largely driven not by the results of hundreds of pilots that have taken place in the U.S., but by off-the-cuff policy speculation of a few of the wealthiest men in the world. This is true also of the algorithmic feeds of social media platforms (which are owned by the guys getting all the attention for their speculation).
And it means that even well-intentioned writers and public figures end up focusing their critiques on the tech-ified versions of guaranteed income, instead of programs that have worked for years, with rigorous, independent research and economic analysis showing their positive impact on people’s lives.
All of this begs the deeper question: why would we tolerate an underclass at all? Our nation has a proud history of heroes opposing those who would keep people in chains, whether the literal ones of chattel slavery, or the socio-political chains of Jim Crow. We have a history of labor leaders who brought immigrant workers together to demand the 40-hour work week, and end child labor. And the Suffragists and waves of feminist movement that ensured women could vote, hold office, and fully participate in civic life.
These movements are what built the American Dream: the belief that one should be able to provide a better future for their children through hard work and self-determination. But today, the dream is faltering–a majority of Americans no longer believe it’s possible. That’s because they are falling into a downward spiral of rising costs and sinking wages, disappearing full-time jobs and increasingly precarious gig work.
Guaranteed income is a tool in our policy toolbox that can reverse the trend, putting cash back in Americans’ pockets so they can afford the basics, with trust in and respect for their self-determination in the process.
Building the political will to get there means listening to the recipients of guaranteed income, who certainly know better than the tech titans what it’s like to try to make ends meet in this economy. Their stories provide an opportunity to bring attention away from speculation back to real results.
“That guaranteed income did not replace my ambition. It supported it,” writes Zaaear Pack, a recipient of the Baltimore Young Families Success Fund. “It gave me just enough breathing room to think beyond survival mode. Instead of constantly asking how I was going to make it through the week, I could finally ask what I could build for my future,”
The stakes of this attentional battle are high. As policymakers look for clarity amid the noise, we know these stories - the stories of the people most impacted by these programs - will ground the conversation and guide the path forward long after this media moment ends, and the billionaires (and trillionaires?) have made their way to space.