Two prominent politicians have made unusual policy proposals. Person A unveiled a plan under which companies reaping enormous profits from the artificial intelligence (AI) boom would voluntarily contribute part of their equity to a public fund, with the returns passed on to the public. "People will be richer," he said confidently. Person B went a step further, proposing that 50% of AI companies' equity be collected in the form of stock and the benefits returned directly to the public.
Can you guess who they are? Person A is U.S. President Donald Trump, and Person B is Senator Bernie Sanders, a symbol of the progressive camp. The two men, who stand at opposite political poles, have coincidentally revealed the same problem awareness. This means that how to divide the fruits AI will create is emerging as a major topic in American society regardless of political orientation.
Such discussions have surged because the U.S. K-shaped growth structure is deepening. Criticism continues that while the national economy grows and stock prices hit record highs, the benefits are concentrated in a small few. According to the U.S. Federal Reserve, the top 1% of Americans own more than 30% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 50% own a mere 2.5%.
AI is amplifying this "K-shaped anxiety." People worry that power demand will surge as data centers expand, while also voicing concerns that AI could push out their jobs. AI is perceived as a symbol of technological innovation while simultaneously being a source of anxiety for individuals.
But the solutions proposed do not appear appropriate either. Concerns are significant, including conflicts of interest, equity dilution, and controversy over corporate expropriation. The practical effect also appears limited. According to The Economist, even if companies like OpenAI and Anthropic contribute part of their equity, the share returned to each citizen would likely amount to at most a few hundred dollars. An "AI national dividend" may carry symbolic meaning, but it does not amount to a real solution.
Similar discussions have recently continued in Korea as well. Political circles are raising issues such as excess tax revenue, excess profits, and basic income. Their problem awareness is also fully understandable. However, the solution must be more prudent. Even if Samsung Electronics and SK hynix earn enormous profits exceeding 630 trillion won this year as expected and deliver large-scale tax revenue, simply dividing it up would produce only a one-off effect. The achievements of a technological revolution enable longer growth and distribution when they lead to investment for the future.
