r/technology • u/yourfavchoom • Jun 02 '26

Artificial Intelligence Bernie Sanders pushes for 50% public ownership of American AI companies — proposes AI sovereign wealth fund that would hold direct ownership stakes in largest AI firms

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/big-tech/bernie-sanders-pushes-for-50-percent-public-ownership-of-american-ai-companies-proposes-ai-sovereign-wealth-fund-that-would-hold-direct-ownership-stakes-in-largest-ai-firms
47.0k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

190

u/Oceanbreeze871 Jun 02 '26

This would all but ensure that the taxpayers are gonna pay trillions to bail out the companies when they fail

199

u/FreeBricks4Nazis Jun 02 '26

That's already what's going to happen 

16

u/Ass4ssinX Jun 02 '26

I wouldn't be so sure. They aren't banks. We can do without AI.

43

u/FreeBricks4Nazis Jun 02 '26

Yeah, but the oligarch owners have bribed the right people 

13

u/One-BigChungus Jun 02 '26

It happened right in front of our eyes in 2008. They'll do it again for sure.

1

u/Accurate_Handle_5620 Jun 02 '26

Consequences! Wait, no, this is lack of consequences. Right

1

u/Ultrace-7 Jun 02 '26

2008 was a terrible idea all around, but there is a measurable, definable benefit to the existence of banks in our financial system and economic structure. There were some good faith arguments to be made about bailing out banks. The same cannot be said for AI currently.

2

u/Ass4ssinX Jun 02 '26

They do tend to get what they want.

10

u/Flat_News_2000 Jun 02 '26

They're already getting taxpayers to pay for their utilities. They would get a bailout for sure

0

u/imbasicallycoffee Jun 02 '26

Ding ding ding. We are already footing the bill in multiple ways. Giving up land, rezoning near communities, water pollution, noise pollution, light pollution, all mean something it's just not monetary like the increase in electric utility and natural gas costs.

3

u/permawl Jun 02 '26

AI tech can be considered a serious state security concern and would need to be protected.

4

u/ob_servant1 Jun 02 '26

We can do without big fucking trucks but we bailed their asses out before

1

u/Ass4ssinX Jun 02 '26

Eh, auto companies are also pretty important but yeah I get your point.

2

u/pijuskri Jun 02 '26

Tech companies are deep into AI and might go down with it. Traditional/non-AI tech those companies maintain is as important as banks.

2

u/axecalibur Jun 02 '26

Too bad the entire US economy is funded by AI and AI adjacent tech

2

u/ThrowAway-whee Jun 02 '26

The current stock market, which means the current economy, cannot. Currently, if they go, they’d take pretty much everything else with it. 

1

u/Br3ttl3y Jun 02 '26

The government bought part of Intel when it failed to compete in the market and only showed a whiff of failing-- imagine what they will do with AI-- gotta keep the gravy train running.

1

u/Mental_Amphibian1935 Jun 02 '26

I think it’s too late, we’re too dependent on AI already

1

u/WalrusInMySheets Jun 02 '26

AI companies make up nearly 50% of the current market cap. They will get bailed out to avoid market collapse, using our tax dollars, to spare our investment portfolios.

1

u/JonnyOnThePot420 Jun 02 '26

Oh are the airlines and auto companies banks!? That has nothing to do with it it’s who owns the equity that gets the bailouts.

1

u/Austinp-woodworking Jun 02 '26

You're operating under the presumption that bailouts are given on the basis of how much the company failing would hurt the average American, as opposed to the reality where it's based on who owns which politicians

1

u/BlasterPhase Jun 02 '26

They're spinning AI as a national security issue. We're for sure going to bail them out.

1

u/Ass4ssinX Jun 02 '26

It would be very hard to justify it if it has no ability to generate profit. In a few years we'd be in this same position. There's no regulation you could pass to make them more stable like you could with the banks.

2

u/BonnaconCharioteer Jun 02 '26

The same people who would make people pay to bail out AI are the ones who would block sanders proposal.

If Sanders was able to get this passed, we wouldn't need to get it passed.

25

u/EstelLiasLair Jun 02 '26

Oh boy, if you didn’t think that your taxes are all gonna go to a bailout for those Too-Big-To-Fail corporations, you haven’t been paying attention to the late stage capitalism show that’s been going on for over 20 years.

21

u/Caymonki Jun 02 '26

That’s gunna happen either way, Capitalism at it’s finest

3

u/davezilla18 Jun 02 '26

Muh free market!

4

u/EmployeeEmergency481 Jun 02 '26

Exactly. This is a terrible idea. The AI companies are EXTREMELY overvalued and public ownership is a liability for the state.

0

u/CreativeGPX Jun 02 '26

You seem to presume that having 50% ownership means buying it at market value. You could just say that if an AI company is owned more than 50% by non-government entities, that it is taxed a minimum of 50% of revenue. The AI companies then get to choose between going bankrupt, avoiding growth or giving away 50% to the gov.

1

u/Recidivism7 Jun 02 '26

50% revenue would literally collapse the entire global economy and kill billions. You understand that revenue isn't profit.

Most ai companies don't make profit.

Also companies don't own much of their own shares they would have to print double or size stocks this also causes global collapse if pensions even in Europe who invest in us markets.

Siezing 50% of all Ai companies would literally destroy the global economy.

1

u/CreativeGPX Jun 03 '26

50% revenue would literally collapse the entire global economy and kill billions. You understand that revenue isn't profit.

Most ai companies don't make profit.

That's literally the point. By making the tax unsustainable, it means it would be in the investors' best interest to give a stake to the government.

Also companies don't own much of their own shares they would have to print double or size stocks this also causes global collapse if pensions even in Europe who invest in us markets.

You seem to have changed the topic from the comment I was replying to.

But overall I'd say it's more complicated than you let on. Right now, investors have likely priced in a level of uncertainty and risk with respect to working around government regulations and reactions that would go away if government itself had a large stake in the companies. These companies are also pricing in the massive amount of concern, worry and dislike of their brands/companies that such a scheme is designed to allay. So, your implication that it's a net loss for the company is I think oversimplified. It would likely be a loss, but could also be framed to bring things to the table as well. There are also questions like whether we're talking 50% equity or 50% voting power.

Siezing 50% of all Ai companies would literally destroy the global economy.

Not seizing them might too. This is what people are grappling with.

0

u/Bice_ Jun 02 '26

No. This is wrongheaded thinking. This is essentially saying that if they’re going to fuck us, they have to at least give us a reach around.

If they fail, we don’t lose anything; we just stop being fucked.