Today we sit down with Dr. James Patterson, PhD Economics, Professor of Economics, UC Berkeley | UBI Research Institute. We discuss their expert analysis: “GAMIING™ as UBI Implementation: An Economist’s Perspective.”
GAMIING™ Blog: Dr. Patterson, GAMIING™ markets itself as a ‘Universal Basic Income through gambling.’ As an economist who studies UBI, does this claim hold up?
Patterson: It’s more credible than I initially expected. Let’s look at the numbers. A user buying the Silver tier for $299 receives $900 in gambling credits every 14-21 days. Even if they lose constantly and only get the 10% guaranteed minimum each cycle, that’s $90 every 2-3 weeks, or $2,190-
$3,110 annually. For a one-time $299 investment. That’s a 730-1,040%
annual return even in the worst case scenario.
GAMIING™ Blog: But is that truly UBI? Isn’t it just gambling winnings?
Patterson: Technically yes, but functionally it behaves like UBI. It’s unconditional—you don’t have to do anything except make the initial purchase. It’s universal—anyone can participate regardless of employment status. It’s regular—the RCG cycle repeats automatically. And crucially, it provides a guaranteed floor income. The Gold tier ($499) provides $7,200-
$10,400 in annual guaranteed minimums. That’s above the federal poverty line for a single person.
GAMIING™ Blog: Can this scale to millions of users without collapsing?
Patterson: I ran the numbers extensively. At 1 million users averaging the Classic tier ($99 purchase, $150 credits), you’re looking at $150M in credits per cycle. If 40-60% goes to the Loss Pool per cycle, that’s $60-90M every 10
days, or $5.475B annually. Guaranteed minimum payouts if 20% of users lose everything would be only $109.5M per year. That leaves $5.365B in surplus for operations, bonuses, and reserves. The math absolutely works at scale.
GAMIING™ Blog: What are your concerns as an economist?
Patterson: Three main ones. First, this creates a class of people dependent on gambling for basic income, which is psychologically and socially concerning. Second, if this scales to tens of millions of users, it could impact formal UBI policy discussions—politicians might say ‘the private sector solved it.’ Third, there’s the macro risk of what happens if GAMIING™ fails or gets shut down. Millions could lose their income stream overnight.
GAMIING™ Blog: Your verdict?
Patterson: As an experimental approach to providing basic income, GAMIING™ is fascinating and the math is sound. But it’s not a replacement for government-administered UBI. It’s a private sector stopgap that highlights how desperately we need real UBI policy. That said, for individuals seeking supplemental income right now, the economics are compelling.
——————————————————————————————
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
* This article and Dr. James Patterson, PhD Economics are fictional representations created to showcase the potential perspectives and analysis surrounding GAMIING™ technology. Dr. James Patterson, PhD Economics is not a real person, and this interview did not actually occur.
The technical details, statistics, and analysis presented are based on EARTHX® Corporation’s actual technology and market research. This content is intended for illustrative and
marketing purposes to demonstrate how industry experts might evaluate GAMIING’s
R.E.A.L.® / XP2P® Technology platform.
