The use cases are identical. The issue that seems to block people is thinking of basic income as a replacement for all income. It's not, although it can be if people choose that route. It's primarily an income floor and so it operates as more of a springboard than a traditional safety net where the full universality and lack of conditions better enables people to transition into and out of earned income arrangements.

It's also not something that should exist in a vacuum as the only policy in existence, or in my opinion stay at a poverty level amount forever. I think as automation advances, we should focus on all working fewer hours in order to better share the available work. If there's half as much paid work for humans to do, then we could all work half as much and be just as employed. That also means the entire population could be earning income in addition to their basic income if say 20 hours per week became the norm instead of 40 hours.

In regards to a rising level, I think UBI should be linked to productivity. As we all accomplish more with less thanks to technology, and especially considering the fact that we've as taxpayers paid for the technology replacing us, and trained the algorithms learning to duplicate our work, the amount should increase over time at a higher rate than just inflation.

Here's an article I've written along these lines to get deeper into that.