TL;DR
Thorsten Meyer AI’s Post-Labor Atlas classifies the United States as the most market-led response to AI-era labor disruption among the jurisdictions it compares, pointing to federal AI deregulation, efforts to challenge state AI laws and an income floor tied to work. Confirmed facts include White House executive actions in 2025, a December 2025 order directing an AI litigation task force, 2026 EITC limits and city or county guaranteed-income pilots; the claim that this is a “high-variance bet” is the source’s analytical framing.
Thorsten Meyer AI’s Post-Labor Atlas has classified the United States as the “high-variance bet” in its comparison of policy responses to AI-driven labor disruption, citing federal moves to reduce AI oversight, pressure against state AI rules and an income floor still tied mainly to paid work.
The confirmed federal record includes President Trump’s Jan. 20, 2025 rescission of Executive Order 14110, the Biden-era AI order, and a Jan. 23, 2025 order directing a new AI action plan. The White House’s July 2025 America’s AI Action Plan describes a strategy based on innovation, infrastructure and international AI policy, with private-sector growth at the center.
On Dec. 11, 2025, the White House issued a national AI framework order that directed the attorney general to create an AI Litigation Task Force within 30 days to challenge state AI laws it deems inconsistent with federal policy. The order also called for evaluation of state AI laws and legislative recommendations that would preempt conflicting state measures. Whether those steps will survive court review or win congressional backing remains unsettled.
On income support, the Atlas points to the Earned Income Tax Credit as the main federal floor for low-wage workers. Citing IRS, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Tax Policy Center figures, it says the 2026 maximum EITC is about $664 for a childless worker and $8,231 for a worker with three or more children. The same analysis says more than 150 cities have run guaranteed-income pilots, while Cook County, Illinois, approved $7.5 million in its 2026 budget to continue a $500-a-month guaranteed-income model.
The High-Variance Bet
The country building the disruption made the most distinctive choice of all: bet on the dynamism, regulate it least — even block others from regulating it — and tie the floor to work. The thinnest row on the map.
Independent commentary, produced with AI assistance under human editorial oversight. The views are the author’s own and may change. This is analysis, not policy, economic, investment, or legal advice. Descriptions of US federal AI executive actions, the EITC, “Trump accounts,” and municipal guaranteed-income pilots reflect publicly reported information as of mid-2026 and may change as litigation and legislation evolve. This phase maps differing approaches and endorses none; characterizations of contested policies present competing views, not a verdict, and references to specific administrations and programs are factual and analytical, not partisan. Country and program names are referenced for analysis and imply no affiliation.
AI Growth, Thin Backstop
The U.S. approach matters because the country hosts many of the companies, labs, investors and infrastructure projects driving the latest wave of AI deployment. A policy stance that favors speed and private investment may help U.S. firms scale faster, attract capital and set global technical standards.
The same stance leaves more of the risk with workers, households and local governments. If AI raises productivity and creates enough new work, the U.S. could capture large gains. If job losses, wage pressure or regional shocks arrive faster than new opportunities, the federal safety net described in the Atlas offers less automatic support than stronger income floors or labor-market programs elsewhere.
The distribution question is central. The EITC helps people with earnings, especially families with children, but it does little for adults with no work income and much less for childless workers. Local cash pilots may soften hardship in some places, but they do not amount to a national program.
AI in Discovery and Document Review: Practical Controls for Litigation Teams and Law Firms (The AI-Safe Lawyer Short Guides Book 8)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Orders to Pilots
The Atlas places the United States in a comparative Response Matrix with the European Union, Nordic countries, the United Kingdom and Canada. It rates the U.S. as minimal on income floor, capital and ownership, work and time, and institutions, with skills rated partial because community colleges and federal workforce programs exist but remain fragmented.
The federal AI shift started with the January 2025 rescission of the Biden AI order, followed by the January 2025 leadership order and the July 2025 action plan. The December 2025 national AI framework order then moved from deregulation toward direct pressure on state laws, framing state-by-state AI rules as a compliance burden and a threat to national AI goals.
At the local level, guaranteed-income experiments grew after Stockton’s SEED pilot and later pandemic-era funding. Cook County is cited in the source material as the clearest example of a local government keeping the model alive in 2026 after an initial pilot.
“The thinnest row on the map.”
— Thorsten Meyer AI, Post-Labor Atlas
Pilot's Pocket Handbook: Flight Calculations, Weather Decoder, Aviation Acronyms, Charts and Checklists, Pilot Memory Aids
Used Book in Good Condition
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Preemption Fight Still Open
It is not yet clear how far federal agencies can go in challenging or discouraging state AI laws without new legislation. The December 2025 order relies on agency action, litigation and congressional recommendations; courts and lawmakers have not settled the full reach of that approach.
The labor-market effects of current AI deployment also remain disputed. The Atlas’s “high-variance bet” label is an analytical judgment about risk and reward, not a measured outcome. Evidence is still developing on which occupations will be most exposed, how fast firms will adopt AI systems and whether new work will offset job losses in the same regions and income groups.
Local guaranteed-income pilots also leave open questions about scale, funding and political durability. Cook County’s 2026 funding keeps one program alive, but it does not show that similar payments can or will become a federal policy.
TAX AND EARNED INCOME CREDIT TABLES For use in preparing 2025 Returns: Publication 1040
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Congress, Courts and Local Budgets
The next test is whether the administration’s push against state AI laws produces court rulings, federal agency standards or a bill that can pass Congress. State lawmakers are likely to keep advancing AI rules unless blocked by litigation or federal statute.
On income support, the next milestones are the 2026 tax-year EITC rules, local budget decisions for guaranteed-income programs and any federal debate over whether cash support should remain tied to work. For readers, the issue to watch is whether Washington pairs AI acceleration with broader worker or income protections, or continues to leave most experimentation to cities and counties.
Why and How to Create Effective AI Prompts for Regulatory Compliance: Governing AI Interaction in Financial Institutions (Responsible Regulatory Compliance)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What is the actual news here?
The news is the publication of Thorsten Meyer AI’s U.S. entry in the Post-Labor Atlas, which classifies the United States as the most market-led and highest-risk policy model in its comparison set.
Is the United States banning state AI laws?
No federal ban is settled. The White House has directed legal and policy steps aimed at challenging or preempting some state AI laws, but courts and Congress may still shape the outcome.
Does the U.S. have a federal basic income?
No. The Atlas says the federal income floor is mainly the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is tied to work. Guaranteed-income payments remain local pilots or county programs, not a national system.
Why is it called a high-variance bet?
The phrase reflects the source’s view that the U.S. model could produce high gains if AI growth creates broad prosperity, but could expose workers to sharper losses if disruption outpaces wages, retraining and local support.
Source: Thorsten Meyer AI
