As AI backlash grows, tech billionaires suddenly want workers to get paid for the jobs they erase

Tech leaders driving the AI boom are increasingly adjusting how they talk about it.

Having spent years selling automation as progress, some of the industry's most prominent figures are now promoting ideas they say could soften the blow if AI eliminates jobs.

What's happening?

Several billionaire tech figures have begun backing proposals aimed at boosting workers' incomes as opposition to AI automation intensifies. Futurism reported the change unfolding amid wider anger about lost jobs, surveillance, and other social consequences tied to rapid AI adoption.

One example is Amazon executive chairman Jeff Bezos, who recently said the bottom 50 percent of U.S. earners should owe no federal income tax.

"You could double the taxes I pay and it's not going to help that teacher in Queens," he said.

Elsewhere, Elon Musk has promoted the idea of "universal high income," and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has suggested "universal basic compute," which Futurism said would link everyone's income to a share of his company's revenue.

Some critics see these proposals as an attempt to ease public anger over automation rather than a genuine answer for workers.

Why does it matter?

If AI replaces jobs faster than new ones are created, workers could face lost income, reduced access to health care, and less housing security, especially in an economy where so many essentials are tied to employment.

Many of the people offering these remedies are also pushing hardest to automate work. Futurism noted that Bezos' fortune would take the average U.S. worker 3.8 million years to earn.

What's being done?

The main ideas coming from tech leaders so far are all forms of redistribution tied to AI's upside. Bezos' tax proposal, Musk's "universal high income," and Altman's "universal basic compute."

All are variations on the same message: If machines do more of the work, humans may need a new way to share in the value.

Critics argue that payouts alone do not solve the core problem if companies keep deploying AI without strong labor protections, transparency, or limits on harmful uses. 

The question is whether society should simply adapt to mass automation or set firmer rules around where and how AI is used.

Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.