Eh? I thought the flaw in US safety nets was the income-based "cliffs", whereby taking a better job would often decrease a welfare-recipient's overall income due to the decrease in benefits received.

Notably, this flaw is one of the big reasons why the War on Poverty, and socialism/UBI/etc. in general, disempowers the poor and the poorly-educated. Remember, Rome fell to tyranny in part because its citizens became willing to support anyone who would grant them more bread and circuses.

There are variants that don't have that property.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax

Part of the problem with Basic income is there are a huge # of variants and frequently when you find two people that agree that we should implement basic income don't actually agree on the variant we should go with.

There is a difference in public perception between a welfare state based on public goods, which everyone pays for and everyone benefits from (even if some people are asked to pay more) and a welfare state based on government charity, where only the poorest people benefit. The charity model is one that can make the middle class resent the "undeserving poor" for getting "handouts", while welfare programs based on public goods tend to be very popular.

The welfare state is enormously more expensive. Social Security/Medicare spending dwarfs every other expenditure, and it’s payroll taxes are higher than income taxes for most people. Most people are for reasonable government social programs, i don’t think they have to be given bribes (that they have to pay for) to support them.