5 ms·

Like straight out of a Mitchell and Webb sketch. I bet there will be people on this site as well who don't understand why you can't solve poverty by simply giv

Like straight out of a Mitchell and Webb sketch. I bet there will be people on this site as well who don't understand why you can't solve poverty by simply giving out cash. Although cash is what humans crave, it's got purchasing power.

mikeodds 2y ago
For anyone looking for the Mitchell and Webb reference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE
- Y_Y 2y ago
  https://youtube.com/watch?v=dfwnjO9o8OU https://youtube.com/watch?v=dfwnjO9o8OU Funnily enough the GP comment made me think of this sketch instead (an absolute masterpiece of microeconomic theory). See also the classic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
typicalset 2y ago
This is not an argument, and you have provided no evidence for your claims. There are numerous studies, and indeed meta-analyses of these[1][2] indicating that cash transfers can have a positive outcome for recipients. These interventions are broadly positive, so why oppose them? Whether or not it "solves" poverty is a different question to whether the effect is positive or not. There are a number of extremely different arguments as to why poverty can't be solved by cash transfers e.g. essentialising poverty as a moral failing (I strongly disagree), or a critique of the system which creates poverty in the first place (I broadly agree). I can understand why belief in the first kind would lead to opposition of interventions, but engaging with evidence is important in reaching a conclusion. [1]: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32779/w32779.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32779/w327... [2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01252-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01252-z
- hckevrythng 2y ago
  I can tell you right now handing out straight cash will NOT go well for anyone.
Havoc 2y ago
>you can't solve poverty by simply giving out cash Not directly, but it can solve some of the barriers people in challenging situations have. e.g. someone has skills but can't pass interviews because they look like a hobo...there a bit of money for a haircut may help. So I don't think we should drop the entire just because its not a comprehensive & complete solution
archagon 2y ago
Charities like GiveDirectly empirically disagree. At least in some situations, giving money directly seems to be effective. Poor people are poor, not stupid.

mikeodds 2y ago

For anyone looking for the Mitchell and Webb reference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_4J4uor3JE

Y_Y 2y ago
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dfwnjO9o8OU https://youtube.com/watch?v=dfwnjO9o8OU Funnily enough the GP comment made me think of this sketch instead (an absolute masterpiece of microeconomic theory). See also the classic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

typicalset 2y ago

This is not an argument, and you have provided no evidence for your claims. There are numerous studies, and indeed meta-analyses of these[1][2] indicating that cash transfers can have a positive outcome for recipients. These interventions are broadly positive, so why oppose them? Whether or not it "solves" poverty is a different question to whether the effect is positive or not. There are a number of extremely different arguments as to why poverty can't be solved by cash transfers e.g. essentialising poverty as a moral failing (I strongly disagree), or a critique of the system which creates poverty in the first place (I broadly agree). I can understand why belief in the first kind would lead to opposition of interventions, but engaging with evidence is important in reaching a conclusion. [1]: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32779/w32779.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32779/w327... [2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01252-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01252-z

hckevrythng 2y ago
I can tell you right now handing out straight cash will NOT go well for anyone.

Havoc 2y ago

>you can't solve poverty by simply giving out cash Not directly, but it can solve some of the barriers people in challenging situations have. e.g. someone has skills but can't pass interviews because they look like a hobo...there a bit of money for a haircut may help. So I don't think we should drop the entire just because its not a comprehensive & complete solution

archagon 2y ago

Charities like GiveDirectly empirically disagree. At least in some situations, giving money directly seems to be effective. Poor people are poor, not stupid.