In the Stanford One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence, a point is made that an increase in the usage of artificial intelligence worldwide will eliminate certain jobs and reduce overall employment (Section II, page 39).  The authors of the study argue that a necessary response to this phenomenon will be the introduction of a “social safety net”, or Universal Basic Income.  I believe that a Universal Basic Income is a poor way to respond to the technological advances that AI will bring to our society.  Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a social security that would be given to every citizen of a country that implements it.  This idea has been around for hundreds of years, but these days it is gaining traction with AI threatening many low-skilled jobs around the world.  According to the White House Council of Economic Advisors, by 2036, 83% of jobs that pay an hourly wage of $20 or less will be displaced by AI (1).  Current UBI proposals call for the U.S. to provide each of its citizens with $20,000 per year, regardless of other income earned.  The funds to support UBI would likely come from a tax on the owners of AI machines.  This system has two inherent flaws: it disincentivizes the use of AI and it makes unskilled workers reliant on AI machines for their income.

By taxing the owners of AI machines, UBI reduces the demand for those machines, which will stunt the adoption of AI worldwide.  If the goal of UBI is to offset the job losses due to AI, taxing the owners of AI will do nothing to make that happen.  Instead, it will keep the U.S. at a technological disadvantage as compared to its peers that are using AI.  Artificial Intelligence will almost certainly increase worker productivity, so not using it will only hurt our country in the long run.
	
The other issue with a UBI is that it forces our society to rely too heavily on the government, which relies on AI machines.  Citizens that know they will receive a base income will be less likely to look for work or advance their education.  This will create a society with a large number of unskilled citizens relying on the few citizens smart enough to create and maintain AI machines.  This redistribution of wealth isn’t fair to the ones creating it, and it may eventually lead to a socialist state where there is little to no ability to climb the ladder to higher classes of economic prosperity.

If UBI isn’t the answer to job loss due to Artificial Intelligence, the question remains: what is?  I believe that instead of directly giving money to people, we should instead spend that money towards worker re-training and other similar programs.  It simply doesn’t make sense to have a society of citizens not working when you could instead train them on new technologies.  A nation of highly-educated citizens with jobs is very clearly more productive in the long run than a nation of a few educated citizens and many uneducated, jobless ones.

(1) Dillow, Clay, and Brooks Rainwater. “Universal Basic Income: Why Free Money Could Be the Future of Work.” Universal Basic Income: Why Free Money Could Be the Future of Work | Fortune.Com, Fortune, 29 June 2017, fortune.com/2017/06/29/universal-basic-income-free-money-silicon-valley/. Accessed 11 Sept. 2017