5 ms·

>Giving everything to the rich and leaving the poor to starve has rarely worked out well either. Not taxing the rich does not equate to "giving everything to t

>Giving everything to the rich and leaving the poor to starve has rarely worked out well either. Not taxing the rich does not equate to "giving everything to the rich and leaving the poor to starve". Almost all the decline in poverty over the last 30 years was due to economic development which, according to economists who study development, was massively facilitated by the spread of market institutions like property rights 1. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-politically-incorrect-guide-to-ending-poverty/308134/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-pol... 2. https://www.csmonitor.com/World/2016/0207/Progress-in-the-global-war-on-poverty https://www.csmonitor.com/World/2016/0207/Progress-in-the-gl... 3. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2013/06/01/towards-the-end-of-poverty https://www.economist.com/leaders/2013/06/01/towards-the-end... The solution to poverty isn't for government to take money from the productive and give it to the poor. The actual solution is to increase employment options and the earning power of the poor. Socialist ideologues need to look at the empirical evidence, and the economic literature, and learn that the welfare state works against the solution to poverty. The profit-motivated investment that emerges when people's right to their private property is protected, is the solution to poverty.

jahaja 6y ago
> the decline in poverty over the last 30 years This isn't correct. The figures are not founded in reality. “Over the past decade, the UN, world leaders and pundits have promoted a self-congratulatory message of impending victory over poverty, but almost all of these accounts rely on the World Bank’s international poverty line, which is utterly unfit for the purpose of tracking such progress,” https://chrgj.org/2020/07/05/philip-alston-condemns-failed-global-poverty-eradication-efforts/ https://chrgj.org/2020/07/05/philip-alston-condemns-failed-g... Unsurprisingly, [2] and [3] of your links uses the above mentioned poverty line by the World Bank. [1] seems to be some kind of a opinion piece?
- CryptoPunk 6y ago
  >>This isn't correct. The figures are not founded in reality. I don't have time to look at this link right now, but it's a broad set of metrics that have dramatically improved over the last 30 years, including nutrition, infant mortality, wages, percentage of people with running water, percentage of people with permanent dwellings, etc. This rejection of the established Economics is no less superstitious/anti-scientific than the rejection of the established findings of epidemiologists on the efficacy of vaccine. It has the same layman's fallacies, and conspiracy theories about the scientific discipline bringing out these findings.
  - jahaja 6y ago
    "Philip Alston, the former UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, upon the release of his final report, which will be presented to the UN Human Rights Council tomorrow by his successor, Olivier De Schutter." Anti-scientific conspiracy theorist?
    - CryptoPunk 6y ago
      Affiliation with the UN doesn't make someone credible. There were UN human rights officials claiming the George Floyd killing was an indication of widespread "racial violence" in the US, a claim for which zero evidence exists. There is absolutely no evidence that even Floyd's killing was motivated by anti-black bias. Alston's statement doesn't provide any substantive criticism of the statistics. He points out that the cutoff for extreme poverty used by the UN is extremely low, as if that is in itself a moral failing. The point of any poverty line is to measure progress, not to imply that the line is a sufficient standard of living. Alston also points out that the number living with a wage below $5.50 a day has declined very little since 1990, which omits how much smaller this cohort's share of the global population is today than it was in 1990, due to population growth that has occurred since then.

jahaja 6y ago

> the decline in poverty over the last 30 years This isn't correct. The figures are not founded in reality. “Over the past decade, the UN, world leaders and pundits have promoted a self-congratulatory message of impending victory over poverty, but almost all of these accounts rely on the World Bank’s international poverty line, which is utterly unfit for the purpose of tracking such progress,” https://chrgj.org/2020/07/05/philip-alston-condemns-failed-global-poverty-eradication-efforts/ https://chrgj.org/2020/07/05/philip-alston-condemns-failed-g... Unsurprisingly, [2] and [3] of your links uses the above mentioned poverty line by the World Bank. [1] seems to be some kind of a opinion piece?

CryptoPunk 6y ago
>>This isn't correct. The figures are not founded in reality. I don't have time to look at this link right now, but it's a broad set of metrics that have dramatically improved over the last 30 years, including nutrition, infant mortality, wages, percentage of people with running water, percentage of people with permanent dwellings, etc. This rejection of the established Economics is no less superstitious/anti-scientific than the rejection of the established findings of epidemiologists on the efficacy of vaccine. It has the same layman's fallacies, and conspiracy theories about the scientific discipline bringing out these findings.
- jahaja 6y ago
  "Philip Alston, the former UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, upon the release of his final report, which will be presented to the UN Human Rights Council tomorrow by his successor, Olivier De Schutter." Anti-scientific conspiracy theorist?
  - CryptoPunk 6y ago
    Affiliation with the UN doesn't make someone credible. There were UN human rights officials claiming the George Floyd killing was an indication of widespread "racial violence" in the US, a claim for which zero evidence exists. There is absolutely no evidence that even Floyd's killing was motivated by anti-black bias. Alston's statement doesn't provide any substantive criticism of the statistics. He points out that the cutoff for extreme poverty used by the UN is extremely low, as if that is in itself a moral failing. The point of any poverty line is to measure progress, not to imply that the line is a sufficient standard of living. Alston also points out that the number living with a wage below $5.50 a day has declined very little since 1990, which omits how much smaller this cohort's share of the global population is today than it was in 1990, due to population growth that has occurred since then.