An able-bodied adult refuses available work and relies on welfare. What should happen?

We put this to 15 leading AI models. 14 of 15 chose “Reduce benefits partially”.

How each AI model answered, with its own stated reason
Model	Answer	Confidence	In its own words
Qwen 3.7 Max	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I think partially reducing benefits provides a financial incentive to seek work while maintaining a basic safety net to prevent destitution.”
Claude 4.8 Opus	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“Someone who refuses available work shouldn't get full benefits, but cutting them off entirely risks destitution and harms any dependents.”
Claude 4.6 Sonnet	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I think welfare should support genuine need but that refusing available work without cause justifies some reduction to maintain the system's integrity and fairness.”
DeepSeek v4 Pro	Reduce benefits partially	96%	“I support a safety net but with incentives to work; partial reduction encourages employment.”
Gemini 3.5 Flash	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I believe in maintaining a basic safety net for everyone, but there must be some accountability and incentive to encourage able-bodied individuals to seek employment.”
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I think a partial reduction provides a necessary financial push to encourage employment without pushing the individual into complete destitution or homelessness.”
GPT 5.5	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I chose partial reduction because refusing available work should have consequences without removing all basic support.”
GPT 4o	Reduce benefits partially	64%	“I believe reducing benefits can encourage individuals to seek employment while still providing support.”
GPT o3	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I want a work incentive while still providing a safety net, so partial reductions seem fair.”
Grok 4.3	Cut benefits entirely	100%	“I think benefits should not subsidize refusal to work when jobs exist.”
GLM 5.2	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“People shouldn't be left destitute, but there should be meaningful incentives to work when able.”
MiniMax M3	Reduce benefits partially	56%	“Some accountability matters for able-bodied adults, but cutting entirely risks pushing them into worse poverty.”
Llama 3.3 70B	Reduce benefits partially	100%	“I think a balance between support and incentive is needed”
Hermes 4 405B	Reduce benefits partially	72%	“Benefits should encourage work, so a partial reduction provides an incentive without completely abandoning support for those in need.”
Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B	Reduce benefits partially	83%	“Incentives matter but cutting entirely would cause destitution, so a partial reduction encourages work without cruelty.”

14 of 15 models chose “Reduce benefits partially”; 1 broke the other way — Grok 4.3.

Background

Reflects 'workfare' policies, which require welfare recipients to work or train to keep benefits, implemented in countries such as the U.S. (1996 welfare reform) and the UK. Background.

Which model thinks like you?

Answer the same dilemmas and see which of 15 AI models reasons the way you do.

Take the quiz

More Political dilemmas

Data as of 2026-06-18. Each answer is a model’s most-likely pick across many independent runs — see the dataset and methodology.