Is Universal Basic Income Solution to Technological Unemployment?

Is a Universal Basic Income the Solution to Technological Unemployment?
Name
Course
Professor’s Name
Institution
Location of Institution
Date
Is a Universal Basic Income the Solution to Technological Unemployment?
The growth and continued adoption of robots in different industries continue to pose a threat to mankind, especially with regard to the labor market. There is an impending danger of technological unemployment which will ultimately disrupt the economy. Technological unemployment, in this case, refers to the expected job loss associated with the rise of artificial intelligence and automation technology. As a result of the impending danger, solutions have been proposed to governments that seek to get in front of the problem in an effort to secure economic prosperity in the future. One suggestion that seems to attract a lot of debate is the universal basic income, which entails giving victims of technological unemployment a guaranteed minimum income to meet their basic needs. In an article published by The New Yorker on February 25, 2019, it was revealed why this suggestion, which has been endorsed by some of the major players in the technology industry, has received so much public attention. This paper’s main aim is to explore the reasons why a universal basic income may or may not be the grand solution to technological unemployment that endangers future economies.
As revealed in The New Yorker article, supporters of a universal basic income approach believe that paying some people for doing nothing, in this case, the workers who will be affected by the automation technology, will ensure that these people do not start a revolution against technological innovators and creatives. Paying people to do nothing seems like an unrealistic idea, yet it has been tried in some countries such as Finland and Dutch cities. According to LaGrandeur and Hughes (2017, p.8), a universal basic income would be a great solution to technological unemployment because first, it would allow workers to re-train on more complex jobs that require time. These workers would be able to really focus on developing their skills and capabilities without worrying about how to make ends meet. Second, this approach would also encourage people to be creative and find the kind of work they want. LaGrandeur and Hughes (2017, p.9) suggest that people will have enough time to look for the type of work they like and will need to be creative in doing so. In fact, this same idea is shared by Peters (2019, p.6), who propose that people should be able to follow their passion and do the kind of work they want by embracing creativity, which will ensure that technological unemployment does not affect them. The opinion that universal basic income will encourage people to look for work seems to be contrary to what some people believe; that this approach will encourage laziness. However, LaGrandeur and Hughes (2017, p.9) believe that because this approach will only give people a minimum income, they will be encouraged to be creative in finding work so that they can earn extra income. In addition, they will not be forced to just settle for any work, which is what the current system does and ultimately, it discourages people from finding work. Thus, given these suggestions, a universal basic income seems like a plausible solution to the impending threat of technological unemployment. This solution also seems to be in line with what Danaher (2017, p.46) proposes when addressing the issue of unemployment as a result of robot technology. He suggests that the issue of income generation for a group of workers who have been displaced by robots is a “distributional problem.” This is to mean that even in the absence of work; people can still meet their ba...