Cash for the poor doesn't work very well

[Elixir]

What 'works' depends on what the objective is.

If you give a poor person cash, and they are still poor, then by definition, you didn't give them enough cash to not be poor.

If you set a goal that is not shared by the recipient, and the recipient fails to achieve that goal, then that proves only that you are shithouse at setting goals.

I saw one of Cheato's trump-humpers touting his Great Accomplishments - "He inherited a little bit of money and built it into a multi-billion dollar business"
If you gave a poor person "a little bit of money" ($140,000,000.00) would they still be poor?

 

[Kharakov]

http://www.straighttalkonevidence.o...break-the-poverty-cycle-in-the-united-states/

The left keeps being after this but the data says it doesn't work.

Why would merely giving cash to the poor help them long term? It helps them get by short term. Education is the key to the long term. They should have free college.

Thanks for offering to teach for free. What university do you work for, and how do I gain admittance?

 

[Kharakov]

By far the biggest cause of poverty is a lack of hours worked.

No, it's greed of the top 60%, 100% of whom don't admit that they've banded together to live the good life, and screw over the bottom 40%.

100% of whom don't acknowledge that their actions crush the hope of the poor, 100% of whom deliberately network to exploit the poor, 100% of whom lie about deliberately networking to exploit the poor.

 

[Elixir]

By far the biggest cause of poverty is a lack of hours worked.

No, it's greed of the top 60%, 100% of whom don't admit that they've banded together to live the good life, and screw over the bottom 40%.

100% of whom don't acknowledge that their actions crush the hope of the poor, 100% of whom deliberately network to exploit the poor, 100% of whom lie about deliberately networking to exploit the poor.

99% of the greed of the top 60% is concentrated in the top 1% of the top 60%.*
Redistributing 95% the wealth concentrated there to wages earned by the bottom 15% would almost fix the problem, and still leave the top 0.6% "rich" by almost any standard.


* One of the 87.4% of all statistics that are made up on the spot

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The biggest cause of poverty is not properly valuing the hours worked. And as technology advances, hours worked will shrink, so to talk of working more hours isn't an answer but more a desire to make poor folk work long hours because certain people's sensibilities demand poor people work, struggle, and work.

Few of the poor work a full time job. I'm not interested in whining about the value per hour until they're working full time.

- - - Updated - - -

By far the biggest cause of poverty is a lack of hours worked.

No, it's greed of the top 60%, 100% of whom don't admit that they've banded together to live the good life, and screw over the bottom 40%.

100% of whom don't acknowledge that their actions crush the hope of the poor, 100% of whom deliberately network to exploit the poor, 100% of whom lie about deliberately networking to exploit the poor.

Pulling statistics out of your ass isn't going to help anything.

 

[laughing dog]

Few of the poor work a full time job. I'm not interested in whining about the value per hour until they're working full time.

Do you have disinterested data to support your claim? Because pulling a meme out of your ass is not going to help anything.

 

[untermensche]

Few of the poor work a full time job...

Because they are paid the least amount possible at every job they can find.

They are stolen from at every job they can find.

And they understand this and resist the oppression around them.

Trapped in a world where there labor is not valued at all.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Few of the poor work a full time job. I'm not interested in whining about the value per hour until they're working full time.

Do you ever read what you type? So if two workers do the same the job, same seniority, same skill level, same everything but one works 40 hours a week and one works 35 hours a week, only the one working 40 hours matters, has a claim to the full value per hour of his/her work? Are you serious?

 

[ronburgundy]

The lack of education outcomes are meaningless, given that they only looked at kids that were already in high school when the program started, and thus 15 years of poverty and bad schooling had already done irreparable damage.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Few of the poor work a full time job. I'm not interested in whining about the value per hour until they're working full time.

Do you ever read what you type? So if two workers do the same the job, same seniority, same skill level, same everything but one works 40 hours a week and one works 35 hours a week, only the one working 40 hours matters, has a claim to the full value per hour of his/her work? Are you serious?

Once again, these guys will spin things like a top but that doesn't invalidate the basic data:

http://www.aei.org/publication/explaining-income-inequality-by-household-demographics-2015-update/

I direct your attention to the first chart. You'll probably have to click on it to be able to read it.

 

[laughing dog]

Few of the poor work a full time job. I'm not interested in whining about the value per hour until they're working full time.

Do you ever read what you type? So if two workers do the same the job, same seniority, same skill level, same everything but one works 40 hours a week and one works 35 hours a week, only the one working 40 hours matters, has a claim to the full value per hour of his/her work? Are you serious?

Once again, these guys will spin things like a top but that doesn't invalidate the basic data:

http://www.aei.org/publication/explaining-income-inequality-by-household-demographics-2015-update/

I direct your attention to the first chart. You'll probably have to click on it to be able to read it.

The first chart shows that the people in the lowest quintile, a larger percentage works full time (18.2%) than part time (13.8%). It is not clear whether full time means one job fulltime or simply multiple jobs that add up to full time hours (which I doubt).

Nonetheless, your own link does not support your claim.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient: Evidence from Cash Transfer Programs Worldwide




The short-term impact of unconditional cash transfers to the poor: experimental evidence from Kenya

It works when the problem is a lack of jobs. It doesn't work when the problem is people nobody wants to hire.

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.straighttalkonevidence.o...break-the-poverty-cycle-in-the-united-states/

The left keeps being after this but the data says it doesn't work.

This is not a surprise to me. What the poor need isn't an UBI or welfare payments, it is higher wages for the work that they do. The poor work hard in the US, often at two or more jobs. There is no reason for the US, the richest country in the world, to have anyone who is willing to work to be living in poverty. If your choices are to work hard and to still be poor or to accept support from the government and to be poor, why would we expect anyone to choose to work?

By far the biggest cause of poverty is a lack of hours worked.

[Citation Needed]

I think the biggest cause of poverty is lack of money. Now what causes that is a bit more complicated, but I bet your assertion doesn't break into the top 5. I would suspect dollars paid per hour worked might make more of an impact.

I'm for unconditional cash (aka UBI). I think that it would take at least a generation or two though, for it to really make a difference. No republican or libertarian is willing to make the investment (or vote for it) because they're too busy giving tax breaks to millionaires.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Few of the poor work a full time job. I'm not interested in whining about the value per hour until they're working full time.

Do you have disinterested data to support your claim? Because pulling a meme out of your ass is not going to help anything.

Also, who gives a shit what you're 'interested' in?

Some people can't work a full 40 hour week because they have family obligations (kids, elderly parents, etc). Why do you hate kids and old people so much?

 

[James Brown]

I'm for unconditional cash (aka UBI). I think that it would take at least a generation or two though, for it to really make a difference. No republican or libertarian is willing to make the investment (or vote for it) because they're too busy giving tax breaks to millionaires.

I'm still not sure how I feel about UBI.

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/kl39KHS07Xc[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Horatio Parker]

I like the job guarantee.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Once again, these guys will spin things like a top but that doesn't invalidate the basic data:

http://www.aei.org/publication/explaining-income-inequality-by-household-demographics-2015-update/

I direct your attention to the first chart. You'll probably have to click on it to be able to read it.

The first chart shows that the people in the lowest quintile, a larger percentage works full time (18.2%) than part time (13.8%). It is not clear whether full time means one job fulltime or simply multiple jobs that add up to full time hours (which I doubt).

Nonetheless, your own link does not support your claim.

Nice job of focusing on the wrong thing.

1) Note how the ratio is much higher for those in the higher quintiles.

2) Note the very high number with zero hours in the bottom quintile.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm for unconditional cash (aka UBI). I think that it would take at least a generation or two though, for it to really make a difference. No republican or libertarian is willing to make the investment (or vote for it) because they're too busy giving tax breaks to millionaires.

I'm still not sure how I feel about UBI.

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/kl39KHS07Xc[/YOUTUBE]

I've seen a very scary argument against it: If you implement it and it turns out not to work so well you've got a big problem undoing it. I used to feel it was the logical endgame, the question being when to implement it. Now I'm not so sure.

 

[laughing dog]

Once again, these guys will spin things like a top but that doesn't invalidate the basic data:

http://www.aei.org/publication/explaining-income-inequality-by-household-demographics-2015-update/

I direct your attention to the first chart. You'll probably have to click on it to be able to read it.

The first chart shows that the people in the lowest quintile, a larger percentage works full time (18.2%) than part time (13.8%). It is not clear whether full time means one job fulltime or simply multiple jobs that add up to full time hours (which I doubt).

Nonetheless, your own link does not support your claim.

Nice job of focusing on the wrong thing.

You are the one who made the claim about the poor - that is the lowest quintile. T Face it, your own link contradicts your claim about the poorr - of those who work, a higher percentage work full time. That is from your chart in your link. Furthermore, if the poor work part time in more than one job, it is not clear from your chart if they are counted as part time or full time (if they work enough hours).

The upper quintiles are irrelevant to your claim about the poor.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Nice job of focusing on the wrong thing.

You are the one who made the claim about the poor - that is the lowest quintile. T Face it, your own link contradicts your claim about the poorr - of those who work, a higher percentage work full time. That is from your chart in your link. Furthermore, if the poor work part time in more than one job, it is not clear from your chart if they are counted as part time or full time (if they work enough hours).

The upper quintiles are irrelevant to your claim about the poor.

1) Look at the hours worked in the bottom quintile compared to the others.

2) Look at the full time/part time ratio in the other quintiles.

 

[laughing dog]

Nice job of focusing on the wrong thing.

You are the one who made the claim about the poor - that is the lowest quintile. T Face it, your own link contradicts your claim about the poorr - of those who work, a higher percentage work full time. That is from your chart in your link. Furthermore, if the poor work part time in more than one job, it is not clear from your chart if they are counted as part time or full time (if they work enough hours).

The upper quintiles are irrelevant to your claim about the poor.

1) Look at the hours worked in the bottom quintile compared to the others.

You keep evading the issue - you made a specific factual claim about the poor not working full time. Your own link proves your claim is false.

2) Look at the full time/part time ratio in the other quintiles.

The other quintiles are irrelevant to the your claim about the poor. duh.