When I saw that the argument was based on the outcomes at an Indian reservation I became very, very skeptical of the findings. Reservations are not an ideal ar

When I saw that the argument was based on the outcomes at an Indian reservation I became very, very skeptical of the findings. Reservations are not an ideal arrangement, and there's plenty of evidence that many of their problems came out of "free cash" from the government or casinos. I personally think that over a large enough population free cash undermines the motivation to seek education or employment. Many of the youth there have severe drug and alcohol problems, far greater than global statistics that their rural demographic would suggest. As a counter point, you could look at the success of Native American tribes that receive government grants or casino payouts, vs those that don't, such as the Lumbee Indians. http://www.nativetimes.com/index.php/business/features/2470-lumbee-tribe-builds-capital-success http://www.nativetimes.com/index.php/business/features/2470-... In the case of the Lumbee, there's still a strong sense of helping out folks that need it, but the help is at the discretion of the tribe, not a government (or casino). Furthermore, they've built that system without much federal help. Note that I'm not arguing for an all or nothing approach here, I think it's reasonable for the federal government to help the tribe financially. I don't think it's reasonable to have the government give money directly to individuals in the tribe.