Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

“All your stock shares are belong to us . . . “ Bernie Sanders plans to have the US government seize control of AI companies worth $1.XT



Photo above – future US senator Bernie Sanders, protesting racial segregation at 23. I prefer to remember him as the 1963 version, not the Octogenarian socialist who wants to nationalize our tech companies today.

Wow . . . have the government seize control of AI companies? (See link below). What could possibly go wrong? Bernie Sanders doesn’t seem concerned.

I’m not sure what the end game is here, Mr. Sanders. To make the companies unattractive to investors, and trigger a stock price crash? To slow up development of AI with Senate hearings and new regulations written by the “US department of AI?” To ensure spy capabilities are built into government controlled AI? Or is this a get rich quick scheme? Open AI and Anthropic – a collective stock market valuation of $1.2 trillion – doubled in value over the prior 12 months. Is seizing these companies intended to provide immediate cash for the federal government?

Nationalization is exactly what you’d expect a socialist to dream up. Instead of inventing and nurturing something from the start, simply nationalize it – or at least 50% of it, like Senatir Sanders proposes. We’ve seen this before, in 3rd world countries. Energy, transportation, agriculture. It never ends well. In fact it ends with friends and cronies of government bigshots appointed to run the newly nationalized enterprises, and driving them into bankruptcy due to incompetence.

This is why Russia has no car manufacturing. Why Venezuela’s oil exports declined by almost 50% in 2025 alone.

Let me be clear – I do NOT hate Bernie Sanders. But he IS 84 frickin’ years old, and hasn’t had a good idea since he began serving in congress 35 years ago. His best work came in 1963: opposing segregation and JFK's newly launched war in Vietnam.

I doubt if Sander’s proposal to nationalize AI firms has a snowball’s chance of hell of passage in the Senate. Or being ratified in the house. Or being signed into law by any president, Democrat or Republican.

This does NOT mean that I think AI’s best days are ahead. Analysts are in broad agreement that tech stock shares are “priced to perfection”, and that the mania for overbuilding data centers poses a huge risk of losses, and failure among some of these competitors. I don’t want the government on THAT roller coaster ride either.

In fact, I don’t want the US government to nationalize ANYTHING. Not legacy Detroit automakers. Not sugarcane like Cuba. Not oil and gas like Russia. Not outmoded canals, or mines, or steel mills. Just leave them the eff alone, and let them succeed or fail based on management competency and consumer preferences. Government control means guaranteed incompetency.

I’m just sayin’ . . .


Bernie Sanders bill would seize 50% of top AI firms' stock
Top | New | Old
SumKindaMunster · 56-60, M Best Comment
Don't worry about it. Sanders is notorious for throwing down gauntlets that he knows will go nowhere.

Nothing will come of it, like many of his other desperate publicity stunts.

Term limits NOW....
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@SumKindaMunster i've marked this best comment. i can't think of a single thing senator sanders ever proposed which became actual law. but his voters idolize him

I agree, this is a bad idea, especially considering that the entire economy is being propped up by the AI bubble. Also, it's not like this will actually happen. But didn't Trump already have the government take over 10% of Intel and propose nationalizing Spirit Airlines before they folded? How is that substantially different? Donald Trump, Marxist.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@LeopoldBloom yes and yes. the intel thing was allegedly due to "national security". although this seems dubious. the spirit thing was a vote buying scheme, which quickly fell apart.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
Interestingly, the idea of an AI wealth fund isn't uniquely socialist. Even OpenAI's Sam Altman and leadership at Anthropic have previously floated the idea of a public wealth fund tied to AI growth to offset mass job displacement, though they certainly didn't envision a mandatory 50% seizure of their own boards. That's the only difference.

Few things to clear up, Sanders is indeed proposing that the government take a 50% equity stake in the nation's largest AI firms but u spin a few details.

It is accurate that Sanders announced a plan to levy a one-time 50% tax paid entirely in company stock (not cash) on dominant AI firms like OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI.

Generally critics and market analysts agree that taxing 50% of a company's equity could severely damage investor confidence, trigger massive valuation drops, and stifle venture capital funding for US tech and that it doesn't have a chance in passing

But...

The bill explicitly states the government would take stock, not liquid cash. The end game isn't to provide immediate spending money for the current federal budget. Instead, the shares would sit in a sovereign wealth fund (similar to Alaska’s Permanent Fund or Norway’s oil fund) to pay out dividends to citizens and fund long-term public services.

Also, AI companies are already working on surveillance so Sanders barely matters but Sanders is a genuine person whose stated goal is economic and ethical restructuring, not surveillance. The bill seeks board seats to give the public a vote on issues like job displacement and ethical guardrails.

Bernie's logic centers entirely on data copyright and the "public commons."

He argues that large language models didn't invent their technology out of thin air, they were trained on generations of human knowledge—books, art, journalism, and code.... often scraped from the internet without compensation:

"When a public resource generates wealth, the public should share in that wealth. AI is being built on a public resource far more valuable than oil: the accumulated knowledge, creativity and labor of mankind." — Bernie Sanders, June 2026

Plus AI companies make trillions each year so it's not that bad.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@SatanBurger the idea that taxes on AI can be used to fund universal basic income is not a new one. Musk is also parroting this. but nobody has said how these taxes would work. wouldn't untaxed overseas AI simply render American AI unprofitable, like Chinese cars are putting Detroit out of business?
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@SusanInFlorida ai companies themselves have already flaunted the idea except they weren't accounting for 50% take of their stocks. This is primarily because if they don't then you end up with no jobs and a bunch of angry people.
BohoBabe · M
This would give us more control over AI, which is good.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@BohoBabe you want unelected bureaucrats to have control of AI. You want them to have unlimited access to your personal data?
BohoBabe · M
@SusanInFlorida We have much more control over the government than we do over private companies.
Really, generative AI should be banned altogether. But if we're going to have it, it should be nationalized so we have democratic control of the regulations. Whereas if it was privatized, it would be much harder to regulate because there's a lot of red tape when it comes to regulating private businesses.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@BohoBabe seriously wrong. if you think a private sector product is overpriced, you can buy an alternative. if you think your taxes are too high, you have zero options
jehova · 36-40, M
AI companies are seizing control of private industries personal assets and economy wide finances. While seizing control of private firms may seem risky; whats the alternative? How will we retake control when/if AI seizes everyones data? In pursuit of fair wealth distribution and privacy\security, obviously oligarchs cannot be expected to "equally distribute and share their earnings", How do you propose we ensure conpliance with antimonopoly laws?, especially as oversight is being cut?
Fair prices at the pump has worked out "okay" in some places.
Id like to see price guaging prevented.
In capitalism there is exploitation; usually bc of greed and always toward upward momentum of wealth is a
Monopolistic practice; market share fair taxation, and alternatives are our only other hopes.
What are other countries doing about this?
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@jehova i get the impression that the US government is on board with AI collecting everyone's data. Provided the government can also access and use this data.
jehova · 36-40, M
If we tax ai does AI/robots have a requirement to be represented in the legislature?
Taxation and representation?
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@jehova great question. one of the beach towns on the Atlantic coast gives "hotels and restaurants" a vote in local elections. because they are pay about half the taxes.
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
The industry is already partially nationalised through implicit and explicit taxpayer subsidies and government contracts on favourable terms.

What is wrong with wanting to see a modest return on this investment?
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
@SusanInFlorida

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/map-shows-which-states-are-giving-biggest-tax-breaks-for-data-centers/ar-AA24Wml5
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@SunshineGirl thanks - but aren't most of these property tax suspensions for (10 years) to entice the relocation of factories/data centers? property taxes are county/municipal
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
@SusanInFlorida That is still a public subsidy. A relief that has to be paid for by the general public. Bernie Sanders represents the common wealth, albeit at a different tier of government.
MethDozer · M
All infrastructure ahould be publicly owned, controlled, and operated. The private sector ahould not be allowed to have any hand on any infrastructure or vital service.
MethDozer · M
@SusanInFlorida what do any of those countries have to do with anything?


Also, last time I checked electricity prices are through the fucking roof here and being bought by foreign interests
@SusanInFlorida Well, damn. Today I learned the difference between democratic socialism and a social democracy.

The insult wasn't necessary, though. I'm not one of those people who doubled down when they are proven wrong by links to peer-reviewed articles or articles with sources. You can tell the difference because I don't wear a red hat.

@MethDozer People like @SusanInFlorida mistakenly assume those countries were good examples of properly implemented socialism. They aren't. They are examples of attempted implementation of communism that failed for the same reason communism always fails. Corrupt people take over during the initial tightening of the reins, never allow it to reach the point where government oversight is removed.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@ItsMeMorgue do you know what WEIRD means? "Western, Educated, Insdustrial, Rich Democratic".

virtually all such nations are a cornocopia of market based and social safety net policies. if this wasn't true, it would be impossible to explain the existence of food stamps, section 8 housing, welfare, rural electrification programs, crop subsidies, and federal flood insurance.
Gibbon · 70-79, M
I hate what AI is doing but this is BS. What amazes me more, especially by the replies here that have me blocked, is how many of our younger citizens are falling for the socialism bull crap.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Gibbon the faith in socialism is why i favor more history and financial education in public high schools
...hasn’t had a good idea since he began serving in congress 35 years ago...
So you're not in favor of taxing the rich more than the rest of us, the way they did in the 1950s? That was one of the best times financially in this country's history. There were no billionaires, and the richest Americans were paying 80% income tax so the rest of us could raise a family of four on a single income.

Nationalization is exactly what you’d expect a socialist to dream up.
Because how else can we expect everyone to own it?
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@ItsMeMorgue we already tax the rich more than everyone else. half of the workers in the USA pay zero income tax. The top 5% of earners paid 60% of all income tax.
BohoBabe · M
@SusanInFlorida We tax the rich more when it comes to raw numbers, but not as a percentage of the money they make. There are also so many loopholes that a lot of rich people pay less taxes than the average worker.

Also, who cares? The problem is wealth has become too consolidated. That one problem is the cause of literally every bad thing happening in America and most of the West. We need to do whatever it takes to fix that. If that means taxing the rich "unfairly," so be it.
@SusanInFlorida
we already tax the rich more than everyone else. half of the workers in the USA pay zero income tax. The top 5% of earners paid 60% of all income tax.
Imagine thinking there aren't a ton of loopholes that rich people exploit to get out of paying taxes.

 
Post Comment