> If basic income isn’t enough to survive on, then you’ll still need some other services and so you’ll still have the funding cliff. But if it is enough to survive on, then too many people who are capable of working will choose to instead just survive on it indefinitely.

If it maxes out approximately where current means-tested welfare does, then it will be at a place where you wouldn’t need additional programs to acheive the same level of living possible for those with no outside income under current means-tested welfare. If, as UBI rather than means tested welfare, it also didn’t face the strong disincentive to additional income posed by the current “funding-cliff” effect of means-tested welfare, the obvious effect would be more people working who would under the current system be welfare-dependent, not less.

Your analysis seems to be comparing it to a no-welfare position, but that’s not the system it is replacing.