3 ms·

Cost us? Are you crazy? You mean you want to take a lot of money and throw at something and you imagine it will solve anything?

by fiatjaf 11y ago

Matumio 11y ago
Obviously the extreme lack of money, also known as "poverty", can be solved with money. Assuming that you don't throw the money at "something" but at "somebody", this "somebody" will by definition not be poor any more.
- fiatjaf 11y ago
  If the criteria for "poverty" is "to not be able to get at least x quantity of money per month", to "solve" this you'll need at least to provide that x quantity of money every month. But your definition of "solution" will still be crazy if you do that.
  - vidarh 11y ago
    The point was to make it clear why it is obviously possible to solve poverty by throwing money at it. Now you have a worst case cost. Then the question is how much cheaper can you make it. E.g. how much investment and in what would it take before the network effects and increased trade will ensure there are enough jobs to lift those who can work out of poverty, and provide enough tax revenues for governments in question to care for those who can't work.
  - Matumio 11y ago
    Evidence actually shows that direct cash transfers to the poor can be quite effective and lasting. Have a look at the research done by givedirectly, or this one: https://decorrespondent.nl/541/why-we-should-give-free-money-to-everyone/20798745-cb9fbb39 https://decorrespondent.nl/541/why-we-should-give-free-money...
xj9 11y ago
Responsibly throwing money at problems is exactly how you solve them. There are a lot of factors that we know of that contribute to continued poverty and cause suffering for those subject to it. This would include, among other things: 1. Universal education (free for anyone interested) 2. Universal healthcare (also free) 3. Improved housing 4. Reliable, clean utilities Sure, this stuff might be expensive, but the long term benefit of having more healthy, educated people around significantly outweighs the cost.

Cost us? Are you crazy? You mean you want to take a lot of money and throw at something and you imagine it will solve anything?

by fiatjaf 11y ago

Cost us? Are you crazy? You mean you want to take a lot of money and throw at something and you imagine it will solve anything?

Matumio 11y ago

Obviously the extreme lack of money, also known as "poverty", can be solved with money. Assuming that you don't throw the money at "something" but at "somebody", this "somebody" will by definition not be poor any more.

fiatjaf 11y ago
If the criteria for "poverty" is "to not be able to get at least x quantity of money per month", to "solve" this you'll need at least to provide that x quantity of money every month. But your definition of "solution" will still be crazy if you do that.
- vidarh 11y ago
  The point was to make it clear why it is obviously possible to solve poverty by throwing money at it. Now you have a worst case cost. Then the question is how much cheaper can you make it. E.g. how much investment and in what would it take before the network effects and increased trade will ensure there are enough jobs to lift those who can work out of poverty, and provide enough tax revenues for governments in question to care for those who can't work.
- Matumio 11y ago
  Evidence actually shows that direct cash transfers to the poor can be quite effective and lasting. Have a look at the research done by givedirectly, or this one: https://decorrespondent.nl/541/why-we-should-give-free-money-to-everyone/20798745-cb9fbb39 https://decorrespondent.nl/541/why-we-should-give-free-money...

xj9 11y ago

Responsibly throwing money at problems is exactly how you solve them. There are a lot of factors that we know of that contribute to continued poverty and cause suffering for those subject to it. This would include, among other things: 1. Universal education (free for anyone interested) 2. Universal healthcare (also free) 3. Improved housing 4. Reliable, clean utilities Sure, this stuff might be expensive, but the long term benefit of having more healthy, educated people around significantly outweighs the cost.