Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Welfare

Would the Poor Be Better Off Without Welfare? A Debate Next Week in New York City.

Neera Tanden from the Center for American Progress vs. Tarren Bragdon from the Foundation for Government Accountability at the Soho Forum.

Jim Epstein | 12.6.2017 12:00 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

"Fifteen million able-bodied adults on government welfare would have a better chance at economic betterment if they were taken off welfare."

That resolution will be debated by Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, and Tarren Bragdon, president of the Foundation for Government Accountability, on Monday, December 11 at New York City's Subculture Theater. The event is part of the Soho Forum, a monthly Oxford-style debate series that's sponsored by the Reason Foundation. Its mission is to feature "topics of special interest to libertarians" while enhancing "social and professional ties within New York's libertarian community."

Doors open at 5:45 p.m. and the event starts at 6:30. There will be a cash bar and food that's included with admission. Tickets are $18 ($10 for students) and must be purchased in advance. You can bring a friend for free.

For those who can't attend, we'll also be live streaming the event on Reason's Facebook page, where you'll be able to vote for the winner and drop questions for Tanden and Bragdon in the comments. We'll take a couple of the best and read them aloud at the event.

Later, we'll also run the event the event at Reason TV's YouTube Channel and on the Reason Podcast. For past Soho Forums, go here.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: The Harder It Is to Believe Roy Moore, the Cozier He Gets With the GOP

Jim Epstein is the executive editor of Reason video and podcasts.

WelfareWelfare ReformMedicaidThe Soho Forum Debates
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (29)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Rich   7 years ago

    "Fifteen million able-bodied adults on government welfare would have a better chance at economic betterment if they were taken off welfare."

    "First, let's define 'able-bodied' and 'economic betterment'."

  2. Rhywun   7 years ago

    The question is too vague. Are we talking the original "safety net" understanding, or the modern "lifestyle" understanding of the thing?

    1. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

      I'm guessing that, by "fifteen million able-bodied adults," they have certain welfare programs in mind. E.g., elderly and handicapped are excluded. (though abuse of disability benefits has got to be mentioned at some point, riiiight?)

      1. Stoic   7 years ago

        What happened after welfare reform was that social workers started encouraging people to apply for SSI (for themselves or their kids), so now SSI plays the role that "welfare" (i.e. TANF) used to. The $735/month a person can get with SSI is a lot stronger deterrent to bettering oneself than the less-than-$200/month most TANF recipients get.

        I work in vocational rehabilitation, so I have a problem with the "able-bodied" label not only because it implies mental disabilities don't count, but also because there are plenty of people with legitimate disabilities who are able to work.

        1. BYODB   7 years ago

          The term 'able-bodied' can be read several ways, but from the framing of the debate parameters it seems to imply 'people who are able to work' which would appear to discount those who are actually disabled, either mentally or otherwise.

      2. Rhywun   7 years ago

        Even within that cohort there's room for nuance. We were on it for a few years due to circumstance when I was very young but there was never any question of it being a permanent thing. My mom got back in the workforce as soon as she was able. And we were better off for it. So yeah, the answer is yes, with minor caveats.

        1. BYODB   7 years ago

          Like morphine, public assistance can be helpful to those in need but if you give too much it can be addicting and destroy your life.

          1. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

            Well, many of the current structures are even worse. As, rather famously, the threshold for losing benefits and actually making the amount of money to replace those benefits is quite large.

            I literally know people who had a very hard time getting off certain types of public assistance because they could not earn enough money working to make up for the benefits lost. That's a real negative incentive that comes from the current system.

            Though, nobody needs to argue that the current system is very broken. More like we'd be arguing over what aspects are most broken.

    2. Zeb   7 years ago

      There is another ambiguity to the question as well. Are we talking about what will happen to the poor on welfare now in the short term, or what the state of the poor as a class would be in a system with less or no welfare. If welfare ended today, many people would doubtless be worse off in the sense of having less money/resources to provide the essentials. But without lots of welfare, "the poor" would be a much more dynamic and impermanent class/status.

      1. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

        It says "would have a better chance at economic betterment." While Tanden has the opportunity to weasel around the point of the question, I think a good-faith reading of the resolution is pretty unambiguous.

  3. Crusty Juggler   7 years ago

    Neera Tanden is awful.

    1. Mitsima   7 years ago

      not so bad for a Bajoran, actually.

      What's freaky is that her name is an anagram for "Antenna Deer". Coincidence? I think not!

  4. Untermensch den 2   7 years ago

    Why is Reason sponsoring this? There is no world in which the media coverage of this will be anything other than "heartless libertarians hate the poor." That's a symptom of how piss poor the media is at dealing with complex topics, but it is nonetheless the response that will arrive. The speakers will be depicted as monocle-wearing villains with waxed mustaches and orphan-skin gloves.

    If it were phrased some other way, maybe, but this will ? sadly ? just raise hackles and do nothing to promote the cause.

    1. Hugh Akston   7 years ago

      There has been no media coverage whatsoever of previous Soho Forum events. Why would this one be any different?

      1. Cynical Asshole   7 years ago

        ^This^

        It doesn't involve any celebrities being accused of sexual assaults from 30+ years ago or Trump's tweets, so no one cares.

    2. Unlabelable MJGreen   7 years ago

      There is no world in which this gets any media coverage. I think a couple may have aired on C-SPAN2, that's about it.

  5. Just Say'n   7 years ago

    "There is no world in which the media coverage of this will be anything other than "heartless libertarians hate the poor.""

    By media do you mean Brink Lindsey?

  6. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   7 years ago

    "Fifteen million able-bodied adults on government welfare would have a better chance at economic betterment if they were taken off welfare."

    I'm thinkin' that number's a little light. We have 15 million able-bodied people living in tents in King County alone.

    1. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

      The Jungle is a land of rich cultural value, they are lucky to get to live there while us hardworking schmucks commute from the 'burbs.

  7. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   7 years ago

    Poor people, better off without welfare?! I hope the person arguing for that absurd proposition doesn't call himself any kind of libertarian.

    The libertarian solution to helping the poor is simple: expand the welfare state, while allowing unlimited immigration.

    1. Mithrandir   7 years ago

      Something about that doesn't sound quite right to me.

      1. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   7 years ago

        Well, maybe instead of expanding the welfare state, we could keep it exactly where it is.

        I'm sure unlimited immigration is part of the solution, though.

      2. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

        Just try not to think about it, it all adds up, just don't think about it.

      3. Zeb   7 years ago

        It's because it's someone's weak attempt at performance art.

    2. BYODB   7 years ago

      Indeed, this is more or less the position of Reason overall. Ludicrous as it is, that's their view. Somewhat ironically, it's because of the 'feels' which is contra their reason for existence in the first place.

      It is the literal reason why I refused to give them any money, even while I give them tons of ad revenue.

  8. lap83   7 years ago

    "Would the poor be better off without welfare?"

    Sounds like one of those loaded survey questions that make me want to scream and throw my computer at the wall.

    "Do you think the polar bear cubs who are being killed by global warming should just pull up their bootstraps and get a job?"

    "Do all underprivileged school children deserve an education and chance for a better life rather than being forced to work in a Koch factory until they lose a limb in unregulated machinery?"

    1. DJF   7 years ago

      Dang those kids and their sticking their arms in unregulated Koch machinery!!!!!!

      I use to walk five miles uphill both ways to get my arm ripped off by unregulated Koch machinery. Kids don't know how good they have it!

    2. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

      "Do all underprivileged school children deserve an education and chance for a better life rather than being forced to work in a Koch factory until they lose a limb in unregulated machinery?"

      No, of course not. Why is that a hard question for you? Fauxbertarians.

    3. Zeb   7 years ago

      "Do you think the polar bear cubs who are being killed by global warming should just pull up their bootstraps and get a job?"

      Yes, I do. Stupid polar bears.

  9. DJF   7 years ago

    Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Trump's Tariffs and Immigration Policies Could Make Housing Even More Expensive

M. Nolan Gray | From the July 2025 issue

Photo: Dire Wolf De-extinction

Ronald Bailey | From the July 2025 issue

How Making GLP-1s Available Over the Counter Can Unlock Their Full Potential

Jeffrey A. Singer | From the June 2025 issue

Bob Menendez Does Not Deserve a Pardon

Billy Binion | 5.30.2025 5:25 PM

12-Year-Old Tennessee Boy Arrested for Instagram Post Says He Was Trying To Warn Students of a School Shooting

Autumn Billings | 5.30.2025 5:12 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!