I've been through something very close to what you describe. In the nineties, Romania was a lot like this (I think a commenter also pointed out about Russia, which is true). We did have a "moment zero" in our economy. What happened was that a very small percentage of the population (mostly coming from the political police called "Securitate") took ownership of this unmanned economical vehicle and transformed it into a money making machine for them and for their close circle of friends. Sort of a "silent mobsters brotherhood". It took almost 20 years until their structures started to be shaken.

They did that not only because they were greedy, but also because they were educated. They had knowledge. I find those pieces, knowledge and education, fundamental for a functional system. To the point that we cannot devise the real value of a share if we leave them out. You can't give a share of something to someone who has no frigging idea what that share represents. Or you can, but it won't be moral anymore. In a way, you will lie to them.

The prospect of basic income is interesting and I think it will soon manifest, in one for of another. But it should take into account much more than economics. It should take into account philosophy, spirituality, anthropology.

If this basic income is something that we should "sell" to somebody, well, that somebody is the archetype of the human being. You know what they say in marketing: "know thy client". So we should first understand how human nature works and then decide how to sell something to it. A better model of the human being itself will make the product "basic income" much easier to get traction.

The problem is that this model is rather difficult to explain.