[Insight & Opinion] Artificial Intelligence and Basic Income: The Value of Work and Life

Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer just an auxiliary technology; it has become a force that is fundamentally reshaping the rules of the labor market. In many jobs, humans now find themselves either competing with or collaborating alongside AI, prompting society to reconsider not just employment issues, but the very meaning of work and the standards of social value.

This transformation is likely to have complex effects on the Korean labor market. Among the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Korea has a particularly strong preference for a manufacturing- and export-oriented industrial structure, as well as a culture that favors "stable jobs" in the public sector and large corporations. According to Statistics Korea's "2025 Social Survey," the most preferred workplaces among young people are large corporations (28.7%), public enterprises (18.6%), and government agencies (15.8%), in that order. This indicates that, amid increasing economic uncertainty, young people are placing a high value on employment stability.

However, in the medium to long term, this preference for stability could itself become a risk factor. In Korea, AI is rapidly replacing or restructuring mid-skilled office and managerial positions, which account for a high proportion of employment. The longer job transitions and mobility are delayed, the greater the accumulated shock. Even if these tasks are automated, if workforce restructuring does not occur immediately, productivity stagnates and new hiring is reduced. Outwardly, job stability may appear to be maintained, but internally, both surplus labor and job vacancies occur simultaneously, further reducing opportunities for young people to enter the labor market.

Demographic structure also amplifies these accumulated risks. Amid rapid aging, middle-aged and older workers have strong incentives to maintain their current positions, resulting in low participation in job transitions. Meanwhile, young people experience intense competition for stable jobs at an early stage, and even before competition with AI becomes intense, they face high barriers to entry. This can lead to generational conflict and weakened social mobility.

In contrast, in the United States, the impact of AI is felt more quickly, but adjustments also occur rapidly. With high job mobility and a performance-based hiring culture, technological change in the U.S. often leads to new job experimentation.

Ultimately, the need for institutional mechanisms to cushion the impact on those who lose jobs or face income instability due to the spread of AI is becoming increasingly apparent. Universal income security systems, such as basic income, are one alternative for reducing uncertainty during periods of transition. By guaranteeing a minimum income, such systems enable the unemployed to invest time in retraining and job transitions, rather than remaining in low-productivity jobs out of short-term financial necessity. In societies with a strong preference for stable employment, such systems can help alleviate the fear of change. Recent discussions on a robot tax also stem from the idea that society as a whole should share the efficiency gains brought about by automation. This highlights the tension between technological progress and distributive justice, and may become an important premise for the future introduction of basic income.

However, the universal adoption of basic income brings fundamental questions about the value of life and work. When income is separated from labor, society must reflect on what meaning work holds beyond being a means of survival, and what kind of contribution it expects from individuals. If such a system is introduced without sufficient social consensus, it could lead to decreased motivation to work, intergenerational debates over burdens, and concerns about fiscal sustainability. While basic income may be a solution to technological progress, it is also a system that could conflict with the fundamental pursuit of human happiness and existing frameworks of social value.

AI is now a technology that not only replaces jobs, but also redefines the content and value of work, as well as what society chooses to distribute and recognize through labor. If Korea's preference for stability and new institutional measures fail to harmonize, the result could be greater long-term instability rather than short-term security. What is needed now is not the stability that postpones change, but a careful approach to managing change with the value of human life at its core.

Kim Kyuil, Professor at Michigan State University