Fortune52%
Billionaire Mike Bloomberg warns Trump’s AI ownership plan would make ‘George Orwell blush’ 81%
By Eva Roytburg96%
7/21/2026, 9:58:29 PM
BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Slippery Slope, and False Dilemma, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 32.6% saturation with 109 hits. Analysis detected 739 faulty-reasoning hits from 334 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73.2% and a BS Rank of 81% (3,821 of 19,442 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 80.40% of the article peer group.
The initial deal behind the American AI boom seems to be: private investors would help finance it, taking on the risk; private companies would initially own the benefits of the breakthroughs, then distribute them to public markets later; and the government would help regulate the industry after the fact.
In China, by contrast, the deal is that companies still have to compete for investment and customers, while the government provides the compute.
That bargain is showing signs of collapse — on the U.S. side.
As costs soar, Chinese competitors gain ground and Washington increasingly considers AI to be a national-security asset, President Donald Trump is considering taking a governmental stake into AI companies.
While both the populist left and the right, and the AI companies themselves, have lauded the proposal, one person isn’t cheering: Billionaire Michael Bloomberg.
In an opinion column published in Bloomberg Opinion on Monday, the media company’s founder attacked the proposal, arguing that it would turn Washington from an industry regulator into an investor with incentives for profit, leading to “cronyism.”
“Somewhere, Karl Marx is smiling,” Bloomberg wrote of the centrally planned economy on offer, while the propaganda possibilities would “make George Orwell blush.”
The former New York City mayor argued that Americans do not need their governments to own AI companies in order to share in the technology’s gains.
For one, once they go public, they could just buy shares.
But also, consumers and businesses already benefit from AI through fraud detection, medical research, bookkeeping and other helpful applications, he wrote, while the resulting economic growth could eventually generate more tax revenue for public services.
If AI companies are failing to contribute enough to the public, Bloomberg argued, Washington should fix the tax code to serve the public; not buy them.
Ultimately, he predicted, federal shareholders will likely lead to corruption as the market will transform into a “smoke-filled backroom.”
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.