Rise of the Libercareans

By B E Price

5/29/2026

We are observing the rise of the Libercareans! And no, I don’t mean librarians or libertarians. I mean Libercareans — those people concerned with promoting free markets while also ensuring all Americans are provided with a stake in them and a basic level of support.

This shift is happening at a pivotal moment in American history.

For decades, America’s economic debate has often been framed as a rigid binary: capitalism versus compassion, markets versus fairness, growth versus equity. But a new coalition of entrepreneurs, investors, technologists, and business leaders appears to be challenging that outdated divide. Increasingly, some of the most pro-market voices in America are also advocating for policies designed to spread ownership, expand opportunity, and soften the disruptions caused by technological change. The idea is simple but profound: capitalism survives and thrives when ordinary people believe they have a meaningful stake in it. Rather than abandoning markets, Libercareans want to broaden participation in them, often by utilizing MPERI’s (Market Promoting – Equity Reinforcing Initiatives).

One of the clearest examples is the movement behind “Invest America,” championed by investor Brad Gerstner. The initiative is built around a deceptively powerful concept: give every American child an investment account seeded with capital and tied to long-term market growth. According to Invest America, the goal is to reduce income and opportunity gaps by helping families participate in the financial system and build wealth through ownership.

Gerstner has framed the initiative not as an attack on capitalism, but as a reinforcement of it. In support of the Invest America Act, he argued that “when everyone realizes they can be an owner, it unites our country around free-market principles.”

That sentence captures a core Libercarean insight: ownership changes psychology. People who own assets think differently about growth, innovation, stability, and the future. They become participants in capitalism rather than spectators resentful of it. The coalition supporting Invest America is notable because it includes some of the biggest names in modern business and technology. Michael Dell, Dara Khosrowshahi, and Jensen Huang have all voiced support for the effort.

Dell described the concept as putting “every child in the front row of our economy.” That is not socialist rhetoric. It is market-expansion rhetoric. The philosophy is not about tearing down successful companies or redistributing wealth through punitive means. It is about ensuring more Americans benefit from the extraordinary productivity generated by markets and technology.

This new thinking is also emerging in the debate over artificial intelligence and Universal Basic Income. For years, UBI was largely associated with the political left. But AI is reshaping that conversation. Increasingly, business leaders who are otherwise strongly pro-market are openly discussing the possibility that automation could fundamentally alter labor markets.

Elon Musk has repeatedly warned that AI and robotics could eliminate large categories of work. Years ago, Musk suggested that universal basic income would eventually become necessary because robots would perform many repetitive jobs. More recently, Musk has gone even further, discussing the concept of “universal high income,” arguing that AI-driven abundance could dramatically lower costs and increase prosperity.

Whether one agrees with Musk’s conclusions or not, the significance lies in who is making the argument. Musk is hardly an anti-capitalist. He is perhaps the most iconic entrepreneur of the modern era. Yet even he appears to recognize that an economy driven by superhuman AI productivity may require new ways of distributing purchasing power and opportunity.

That same conversation is unfolding across Silicon Valley.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has discussed concepts ranging from UBI to broader public ownership of AI-generated wealth. According to recent reporting, discussions in AI circles increasingly include public wealth funds, efficiency dividends, and new ways to ensure ordinary citizens benefit from AI-driven productivity growth.

Meanwhile, ALL-IN podcast host and angel investor Jason Calacanis has repeatedly discussed the importance of entrepreneurship, startup ownership, and broad-based participation in innovation as a way to preserve social stability and opportunity in the AI era. While not always explicitly endorsing UBI, voices like Calacanis increasingly acknowledge that technological disruption requires mechanisms that help people transition, participate, and maintain economic dignity.

Even Mark Zuckerberg has hinted at similar themes over the years, including discussions around universal basic income and the social implications of automation. Zuckerberg’s philanthropic and policy discussions have often centered on how technology can increase human potential while reducing inequality of opportunity.

Critics on both the left and right often misunderstand what is happening here.

The progressive left sometimes dismisses these ideas as attempts by billionaires to “save capitalism.” But that criticism accidentally reveals the point. Many Libercareans do, in fact, want to save capitalism — because they believe free markets remain the greatest engine of innovation and prosperity in human history. They simply recognize that capitalism cannot remain politically sustainable if too many citizens feel permanently excluded from its rewards.

On the other hand, some traditional conservatives recoil at ideas like UBI or government-seeded investment accounts because they sound too interventionist. But Libercareans would argue that the real threat to free markets is not limited intervention; it is widespread disillusionment with capitalism itself.

History supports this concern.

When societies experience prolonged inequality, declining mobility, and economic anxiety, people often turn toward authoritarianism, protectionism, or anti-market populism. The danger is not merely economic stagnation. It is political instability and cultural fragmentation.

The rise of anti-capitalist sentiment among younger Americans is a warning sign. Many young people do not oppose markets because they hate freedom. They oppose markets because they feel locked out of ownership. Housing is expensive. Student debt is crushing. Asset inflation benefits those who already own stocks and real estate. Meanwhile, AI threatens to widen the gap even further by concentrating wealth among those who control capital and algorithms.

The Libercarean answer is neither socialism nor laissez-faire indifference. It is broader ownership.

This philosophy recognizes a basic truth: capitalism works best when citizens have capital.

That might mean stock ownership accounts for children. It might mean sovereign wealth-style AI dividend funds. It might mean wage subsidies, portable benefits, or targeted forms of basic income during periods of technological disruption. The exact policies matter less than the underlying principle: preserving a dynamic market economy by ensuring ordinary people can meaningfully participate in it.

Importantly, Libercareans also reject the increasingly common cultural narrative that capitalism itself is inherently oppressive.

Markets are not perfect. But markets have generated extraordinary human flourishing. Capitalism has dramatically reduced global poverty, increased life expectancy, accelerated innovation, and expanded access to goods and services that previous generations could scarcely imagine. Smartphones, antibiotics, instant global communication, modern logistics, cloud computing, and AI itself all emerged from market-driven systems.

Attempts to suppress capitalism often produce the opposite of their intended effect. Overregulation can stifle innovation. Excessive bureaucracy can entrench incumbents. Anti-business rhetoric can discourage investment and entrepreneurship. Economies that punish risk-taking tend to generate less growth, less mobility, and ultimately fewer opportunities for the very people policymakers claim to help.

The Libercarean movement is attempting to chart a different path.

Rather than attacking wealth creation, it seeks to expand it. Rather than demonizing entrepreneurs, it asks how entrepreneurship can benefit more people. Rather than replacing markets, it aims to strengthen public buy-in for them.

In many ways, this movement may represent an evolution of American capitalism itself.

The industrial era produced labor unions and New Deal liberalism. The globalization era produced deregulation and free trade orthodoxy. The AI era may produce something new: a hybrid philosophy that fiercely defends innovation and free enterprise while also embracing mechanisms to spread ownership, resilience, and opportunity more broadly.

The political labels for this movement remain unclear. Some participants would reject the term “Libercarean” entirely. Others may view these ideas as pragmatic rather than ideological. But the pattern is becoming increasingly visible.

The entrepreneurs building the future are also beginning to ask how society survives it.

That question may define the next generation of economic thought.

And perhaps that is the true rise of the Libercareans: not a rejection of capitalism, but an attempt to preserve it by making more Americans owners, stakeholders, and participants in the prosperity it creates.

Wealth inequality has accelerated with the rise of artificial intelligence, as high-skill workers and capital owners capture outsized gains while many others face disruption in traditional jobs. National debt has ballooned past 100% of GDP, saddling future generations with interest payments that crowd out productive investment. At the same time, a cultural and political war on capitalism increasingly portrays markets themselves as the enemy, despite their unparalleled track record of lifting billions out of poverty around the globe.