There is nothing much to research, because the concept contradicts to the most basic principles of ecology, economics and sociology.<p>The first principle is that a population always outgrows its resources. As long as one create conditions to sustain a life it will start to reproduce exponentially. Rabits in Australia is a classic example.<p>The second principle is the scarcity principle of economics. Everything which is easily available loses its value by definition. Any amount of free money would be factored out by increasing of the prices, as if you move the zero on a scale.<p>The third principle is of social hierarchy. Each society forms a hierarchy to be sustainable. It is so fundamental, that we never think of it, but there is no flat societies even in animal kingdom.<p>Again, basic income is just moving a zero on a scale. Prostitutes will not switch to living on that income, they will merely rise the prices, because prostitution is social phenomena much more than economical. The food market will adapt accordingly, so the only food one would be able to buy will be a synthetic crap made out of cheapest substitutes - this is how markets work. Same would happen with housing. Land is a scarse asset <i>and</i> the most ancient status item <i>and</i> a source of income. Free money will change nothing there.<p>And, of course, there were lots of experiments since the beginning of time - all these socialist or communist utopias which failed the reality checks - they crashed and sunk down after a collision with economical and social laws, which are as unalterable as the laws of physics.<p>Simple models doesn&#x27;t work. There is no other way of sustainable ecosystem exept self-regulation due to competition over scarcity of resources. It is very naive and dangerous assumption that human intelligence could beat laws of the Universe or evolutionary forces. The mess we are in is the best evidence.