Basic income’s appeal today is similar to its roots in 18th-century England – it’s a way to compensate people for a common good taken for private gain

2026-03-30 · Source: Artificial intelligence (AI) – The Conversation · Field: Government & Public Sector — Public Policy & Governance, Social Services & Welfare, Socio-Economic History · Depth: Fundamental Awareness, medium

Summary

The concept of basic income, often framed as a solution to potential mass job displacement by AI and automation, is gaining traction among tech billionaires like Sam Altman and Elon Musk, as well as in local government trials in cities like Stockton, California, and Atlanta. However, a scholar of British culture, literature, and politics argues that this modern framing overlooks the historical origins of basic income. Tracing its roots to early 19th-century England, the author posits that the first basic income proposals, notably by Thomas Spence, emerged as a direct response to the "enclosure of common lands." This historical parallel is drawn to contemporary AI models engaging in "expertise theft" by scraping and recombining human-generated content, suggesting that basic income is fundamentally a response to the perceived unfair appropriation of shared resources and knowledge, rather than solely an economic efficiency measure.

Key takeaway

For policy makers weighing basic income proposals, recognize that its historical context extends beyond mitigating AI-driven job losses. Your approach should consider the underlying principle of compensating for "expertise theft" and the appropriation of shared digital commons, similar to historical land enclosures. This reframing suggests that basic income is not merely a welfare measure but a potential mechanism to address a perceived fundamental injustice in the digital economy.

Key insights

Basic income's historical roots reveal it as a response to dispossession, not just automation or poverty reduction.

Principles

• Basic income addresses perceived unfair appropriation of common resources.
• Technological shifts often trigger calls for wealth redistribution.

In practice

• Examine AI's "expertise theft" as a modern enclosure.
• Consider basic income as compensation for lost communal assets.

Topics

• Basic Income
• AI Automation
• Expertise Theft
• Enclosure of the Commons
• Thomas Spence

Best for: Policy Maker, AI Ethicist, Consultant

Related on AIssential

• Why AI Is NOT Stealing Your Job — AI's impact on jobs depends on how its productivity gains are politically and economically distributed, not the technology itself.
• 🔮 Exponential View #578: Fable & time to pause AI; iPhone vs babies; gene therapy, bad CEOs & Chinese Gen Z++ — The article highlights growing consensus among leaders and AI labs on public AI wealth distribution and pausing frontier AI development.
• Algorithms don’t care: how AI worsens the double burden for Indonesia’s female gig workers — AI platforms can perpetuate colonial exploitation by embedding extractive logics that disadvantage women in the Global South's gig economy.
• AI economics for the common good — AI's economic gains risk concentrating wealth, necessitating interventions to broaden benefits for global public good.
• Dumb question: If AI destroys all the jobs, who will be able to buy the stuff that AI-powered companies create? Doesn’t AI destroy its own customer base? — AI-driven job displacement raises fundamental questions about future economic demand and wealth distribution.
• Get ready for the plunge — The "Assumption of Indispensability of Labor" (AIL) is being dismantled by AI, causing economic and ontological crises.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by Artificial intelligence (AI) – The Conversation.