Hope for the future? Could Trump and Musk help create a Global Universal Basic Income?

 Yes, I'm depressed about the fact that the majority of voters in the USA just chose Donald Trump. But I refuse to be despondent. Here are some ideas for how we might exploit the situation to make the world a better place.

The fact is that Trump's alliance with Elon Musk could open some interesting possibilities. At a World Governments Summit in 2017, Musk said the pace of technological change was leading to “a massive social challenge. And I think ultimately we will have to have some kind of universal basic income (UBI). I don’t think we’re going to have a choice.” And he repeated the same thing in June this year. The Hindustan Times just compiled the following list of 8 statements by Musk on UBI

1. "There's a pretty good chance we end up with a universal basic income, or something like that, due to automation. I'm not sure what else one would do. I think that is what would happen. People will have time to do other things, more complex things, more interesting things. Certainly more leisure time." (CNBC, November 4, 2016).
2. "I think we'll end up doing universal basic income. It's going to be necessary. There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better. I want to be clear: These are not things I wish will happen — these are things I think probably will happen." (World Government Summit in Dubai, February 13, 2017)
3. "Universal income will be necessary over time if AI takes over most human jobs. Also think there should be a universal basic income that doesn't change even if you get a job. Productivity should be rewarded." (X posts, June 15 and June 20, 2018)
4. "I'm in *favour* of universal basic income. Goal of government should be to maximize the happiness of the people. Giving each person money allows them to decide what meets their needs, rather than the blunt tool of legislation, which creates self-serving special interests. If we do a stimulus at all, it should just be direct payments to consumers." (X post, July 24, 2020)
5. "The $1400 ( ₹1.17 lakh) is mostly good imo (UBI lite), as the people get to choose how the money is spent, but the rest is mostly net bad for the people as a whole." (Commenting on pandemic stimulus in a X post, March 6, 2021)
6. "What is the economy at its foundation? It is labor. So what happens when there is no shortage of labor? This is why I think long-term, there will need to be universal basic income." (AI Day, August 2021)
7. "There will be universal high income, not basic, in a positive AI future. No scarcity, except that which we define to be scarce. In that scenario, everyone can have whatever goods & services they want. It is less clear how we will find meaning in a world where work is optional. (X post, December 25, 2023)
8. "In a benign scenario, probably none of us will have a job. There would be universal high income. There would be no shortage of goods and services. The question will really be one of meaning: if a computer can do, and the robots can do, everything better than you, does your life have meaning? I do think there's perhaps still a role for humans in that we may give AI meaning." (VivaTech, May 23, 2024)

So, let's assume that Musk can convince Trump that we need a Universal Basic Income.

Let's also suppose that we are talking about a Global Universal Basic Income, which would be paid to every adult on the planet. Let's be generous, and assume that we want to give every adult $1 a day, or $365  a year, and half that amount to the guardians or parent of each child 16 or under.

Using the latest figures from the United Nations for people of different ages, the table below shows that it would cost nearly $2.6 trillion a year. Now, that may seem a lot. But it's only 0.55% of the total amount of net wealth for the world's population - $450 trillion according to the UBS Global Wealth Report for 2024 - see my earlier post. 

It follows that if everyone paid just 0.55% of their net wealth, you could provide $1 a day for everyone. 

Let's suppose that Elon Musk can convince his billionaire friends that paying 0.55% of their net wealth per year might be worthwhile if it meant that they could sleep more soundly. Of course, everyone would have to pay 0.55% - including you and me. 

 But now, it would mean that wherever you are on the planet, you would be getting a small amount of money, with no strings attatched. 

$1 a day might not seem much, but for people living in many countries, it's not far off the median income, as shown in this table from the world population review. 

Now, this is where it may be possible to get even Trump on board. He wants to discourage people from what he terms "shithole countries" in Africa and elsewhere from trying to get into the USA - complaining that he would rather have people from Norway. Well, suppose that those people could be sure of getting money, even if they stay at home. The "value" of $1 to someone living in a "shithole" country would be far more that it would be if they were to try to move to a more affluent country. 

 Of course, this incentive to stay home gets even more strong if the Global UBI rate is increased. This table shows that you could finance $100 a month ($1200 a year) by increasing the annual Net Wealth tax to 2.2%. Even that rate is not excessive when we know that people's financial assets are often increasing in value by 8% per annum or more.

But the power of the argument becomes even stronger if, in addition to the Global UBI of $100 a month, Trump's government stepped in to increase the monthly UBI rate for bona fide US citizens to say $500. This would remove the need for many complex benefits systems. But at the same time, the $500 a month would not be available to the tens of millions of undocumented immigrants that Trump has been complaining about, and has said he wants to deport. 

Currently, an undocumented Mexican worker can come to the US, get a agricultural job picking fruit on a farm (if the farm owner is not too fussy), and undercut local workers with US citizenship. But, with a $500 a month UBI paid to US citizens, they would be able to undercut the migrant workers because they could live reasonably with a lower wage for working. 

Personally I feel compassion for migrant workers, who are just trying to survive. But providing everyone on the planet with a (modest) basic income that they can keep with no strings attached would provide an incentive for people who live in very poor countries to stay where they are. That would avoid huge numbers of unnecessary deaths for people travelling thousands of miles to reach some sort of Eldorado in developed countries. And then, if the developed countries provided additional UBI payments that were only available for people who are legally present, this would provide yet another strong argument to discourage illegal immigration. 

I've been talking about this for Trump and Musk, but of course the same arguments would apply for France and the UK too.

If my dream of a truly Global UBI came true, thanks to the arrival of Trump and Musk in the USA, then there might just be a silver lining to the dark black cloud that arrived with the results of the US elections yesterday.