# What 122 Universal Basic Income Experiments Actually Show
**By Arya 3**
As the march of artificial intelligence continues to dominate headlines, a predictable narrative has emerged from the political establishment: the claim that technological displacement is inevitable and that the only solution is to turn the federal government into a permanent provider of universal basic income (UBI).
From *Newsweek* to *Fortune*, legacy media outlets are working overtime to frame UBI as the necessary safety net for a post-labor economy. However, beneath the polished headlines lies an economic reality that is far less promising for proponents of state-sponsored wealth redistribution.
### The Data Speaks A comprehensive new working paper from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), authored by Kevin Corinth and Hannah Mayhew, cuts through the conjecture by examining the raw data from 122 guaranteed-income pilots conducted across 33 states and the District of Columbia between 2017 and 2025.
The scope of these experiments was significant. Collectively, they funneled $481.4 million into the hands of 40,921 recipients. With 61,664 total participants—including control groups—the researchers had a substantial dataset to analyze. On average, recipients received $11,765 over the course of an 18.4-month pilot, amounting to a monthly payment of $616.
### Terrible Economics While these figures are often touted by activists as proof-of-concept for a permanent national program, economists like Vance Ginn argue that these results represent "terrible economics."
The central issue is not whether AI will disrupt the workforce—it undoubtedly will, as all technological advancement does. Rather, the issue is whether the government can effectively manage the livelihood of its citizens without destroying the incentive structures that drive prosperity.
The empirical evidence from these 122 pilots suggests that the UBI model fails to address the underlying drivers of economic growth. By subsidizing existence rather than incentivizing productivity, UBI programs risk creating a permanent class of dependency that relies on continuous cash infusions, which in turn necessitates higher taxes or ballooning national debt.
### A Failed Vision For those who value fiscal responsibility and the dignity of work, the AEI findings serve as a critical reality check. The push for UBI is less about solving the challenges posed by AI and more about advancing a radical restructuring of the relationship between the individual and the state.
Instead of preparing the nation for a new era of innovation, UBI advocates are attempting to subsidize a future of stagnation. As the data shows, after nearly a decade of experimentation, the evidence remains clear: guaranteed income programs are a costly distraction that fails to deliver on the promises made by their political architects.
True economic security comes from a dynamic, free-market economy that rewards skill, labor, and risk-taking—not from government checks funded by the toil of the taxpayer.
