I believe in relative utopianism (think the young, independent America in the past compared to other places in Europe at the time) but I see your point. You could in fact think of yet another scenario in all this: individualised, automated revenue streams where you contribute to a commons (like Wikipedia, GitHub or a public form of Uber) but instead get paid for it a steady income depending on the utilitarian value of your contribution. Nothing gets stale on Wikipedia so you can imagine how much one might get paid for contributing to a commons pool of software, resources or information (monetising your personal data is also something to look into, perhaps this might qualify as one of the “new jobs” you mentioned).
I was once sceptical of BI because many people arguing for it appeal to the power of the state in order to plan and implement it. But how will governments decide how much to give to society? What if it’s not enough? What is it supposed to be used for anyway? However, if you tell me that you’re supplying seed capital (future insurance money?) for everyone to get started on these “new jobs” that may ultimately see that person profiting from automated wealth generation of his or her own making, that would be an incredible investment for all. The extra tax returns for BI may be included as a bonus. The possibilities are endless but BI should indeed add to a person’s sense of worth and value for it to be accepted. It’s not just about financial outcomes as you say.