(2024-07-20) Azhar Turning Ubi On Its Head

Azeem Azhar: Turning UBI on its head. UBI should not be just about survival or consumer spending. Instead, it should be seen as a catalyst for driving technological change. A kind of long-form state support could shore up social cohesion and lead to better governance. That would have a halo effect.

People are more likely to participate in the technological (economic) transition positively if they feel secure and supported, including reskilling, upskilling, or even becoming entrepreneurs, thereby creating complementary services and products.

In this view, UBI is a requirement for, not a consequence of, technological transition.

State support is not new or radical, but looking at history could help change attitudes towards UBI – considering it instead as a step-change in the evolution of state support.

These reforms stem from diverse rationales, each rooted in different aspects of societal need and governance. Politically, they reflect a desire for social stability. Economically, they acknowledge that robust economies require a certain level of human capital, and that many interventions, such as public health initiatives, provide positive externalities. Finally, and perhaps most subjectively, these reforms are driven by moral and ethical considerations about the kind of society we wish to create and sustain.

This happens for good and for bad, of course. Richer advanced economies — consider France and the UK — are struggling with the unrealistic expectations of older demographics, demanding retirement at 60 or 65 and pensions untethered to the realities of a changing world.