A Universal Basic Income Would Insure Against Job Loss

Andy Stern, a Ronald O. Perelman senior fellow at the Richman Center at Columbia University, is the former president of the Service Employees International Union and the author of "Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream."

Updated October 4, 2016, 3:21 AM

We should be extremely concerned about our children’s and grandchildren’s future given that McKinsey Global Institute research shows that machines and computers could replace people for 45 percent of all tasks, that a 2013 Oxford University study concluded that 47 percent of jobs in the United States are at risk of being automated, and that driverless trucks could eliminate what is the No. 1 job in 29 states. Experts warn of a tsunami of job losses.

Universal basic income would supplement not substitute for work, adding consumer power and helping people start businesses, get retrained or pay tuition.

As insurance against the difficult transition to new jobs or future job losses, the United States should institute a universal basic income, an idea whose history can be traced to Thomas Paine, Milton Friedman and Richard Nixon. Nixon’s proposal was passed twice by the House of Representatives.

How would it work? Each month, every adult would get a check for $1,000 — that's $12,000 a year, which would finally put everyone's income above the Federal poverty line. It would be a supplement not a substitute for work, adding consumer purchasing power and helping people start small businesses, get retraining or pay tuition. It would compensate caregivers for raising children or helping a parent.

A form of universal basic income has existed in Alaska since 1976, as residents receive a dividend from North Shore oil revenues, and experiments are planned, in Canada, Finland, the Netherlands and Africa.

A universal basic income can help Americans and America prepare for the future.