Bloomberg Warns: State Ownership in AI Companies is a Recipe for Innovation Stagnation and Propaganda

In political circles in Washington, a dangerous trend is gaining momentum: the idea of turning the state into a co-owner of the largest artificial intelligence companies. Although both major political parties see potential financial benefits in this, Michael Bloomberg warns that such a move could undermine the foundations of innovation and democracy.

Proposals range from senator demands to transfer significant capital to "sovereign funds," to support from the presidential administration, which believes that state ownership would guarantee benefits for the American people. According to Bloomberg, however, American society is already benefiting from AI through increased productivity in medicine, finance, agriculture, and small business, and these benefits are most effectively distributed through economic growth and tax revenues, rather than through direct state management.

Risks of Political Interference

The main argument against state ownership is the risk of replacing market meritocracy with political favoritism. When the government becomes a shareholder, the interests of politicians often outweigh economic efficiency. This could lead to:

• Stifling competition: Large corporations, backed by the state, can easily block smaller startups.
• Erosion of innovation: Companies will strive for "politically safe" solutions instead of risky but breakthrough technologies.
• Corruption and lobbying: Business success may begin to depend on political connections rather than product quality.

AI as a Tool for Propaganda

An even more serious risk is related to freedom of speech. Since artificial intelligence platforms are primary sources of information, state control over them would give the government an unprecedented opportunity to manipulate data, knowledge, and public opinion. Bloomberg emphasizes that the potential for state propaganda through AI is so great that it could pose serious threats to democratic freedoms.

Instead of attempting to acquire control over the industry, the author suggests focusing on improving the tax code to ensure resources for social security and education, without disrupting the free market that has made the American AI sector a global leader.