Basic income is very cheap to administer — removing huge staffs and lengthy, error-prone processes disliked by libertarians and liberals alike – and it avoids the perverse incentives which do things like punish parents for getting a job which pays enough that they lose childcare support but not enough to come out ahead after replacing it. The other big win is that if it doesn't require a visible symbol, you avoid the cognitive trap where someone sees someone using food stamps to buy a steak and spends the next 20 years yelling about how wasteful welfare is (and, of course, never once asking how much it cost per calorie).

Because we are not going to call a universal basic income "welfare." Rather, we are going to call it "The America Permanent Fund" and loudly brag about how it's just a copy of the wildly-popular Alaska Permanent fund, that literally nobody has opposed ever.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that has less to do with nomenclature and more to do with oil, rather than working Alaskans, paying for the Permanent Fund. Plus there can't be too many people aiming to go through life living solely off the Permanent Fund.