The scenario you outline is pretty speculative. Moreover, we're assuming that a pure basic income is politically unpalatable. Given that constraint, I'd rather

The scenario you outline is pretty speculative. Moreover, we're assuming that a pure basic income is politically unpalatable. Given that constraint, I'd rather take a half-assed version over nothing at all. Also, if you keep the narrative simple and consistent, and the initial base is broad enough, I think it can maintain its appeal. The message behind Social Security is that you're entitled to payments because you put money in initially -- even if you ultimately get out more than you put in. As such, it's proven to be surprisingly resilient to attempts to impose restrictions on it. Likewise, because the EITC is administered through the tax system, which everyone participates in -- regardless of whether you're a felon or not. Because it's framed as a tax benefit that everyone is potentially eligible for, it's also held up surprisingly well.