New York assemblymember and congressional candidate Alex Bores has unveiled a proposal for an AI dividend: direct payments to Americans designed to help cushion potential job losses as artificial intelligence expands. In a post on X, Bores described the plan as a way to ready the country and its workforce for the risk of large-scale displacement of human labor by AI.
Bores says the dividend would be financed through tax and policy changes, including a tax on AI usage, taking equity stakes in leading AI companies, and reforms to how labor and capital are taxed. The proposal also includes incentives for employers to hire human workers instead of relying solely on AI. Bores is promoting the idea as part of his congressional campaign, so any implementation would depend in part on electoral success.
Beyond direct payments, the plan earmarks money for workforce transition efforts: retraining and education programs, support for displaced workers, and the creation of oversight and safety infrastructure to govern AI deployment. The proposal frames the dividend as a simple principle: if AI significantly boosts productivity and concentrates wealth, the public should share in those gains. It calls the dividend a form of insurance that would activate if AI meaningfully displaces American workers, not a penalty on innovation.
Concerns about AI-driven job losses have grown recently. A Goldman Sachs estimate cited by proponents suggests AI adoption coincided with roughly 16,000 job losses per month over the past year. Several large tech firms, including Amazon, Meta, Intel and Microsoft, have pointed to AI-related efficiencies when announcing workforce reductions.
However, not all analyses foresee large short-term job declines. A Morgan Stanley report dated April 14 argued the labor impact of AI has been modest so far, noting historical patterns where new technologies create new types of work even as they displace others, while acknowledging AI could deviate from that precedent.
This coverage was produced in line with Cointelegraph’s editorial standards. Readers are encouraged to verify details independently and can review the publication’s editorial policy for more information.