Skip to main content

Giving Money to People Doesn’t Do Sh*t to Improve Their Lives

By July 19, 2022Commentary

A lot of commentary recently on social and policy issues as I run through some stored-up research.  As usual, the common thread is an undermining of perceived current wisdom, or should I say lack of wisdom, as reflected in the whacked progressive segment of our population which runs most of our public policy.  These idiots are irredeemable.  Sorry if that seems harsh, but when has there been enough destruction of our society and economy to finally discard this ideology in the landfills which are its deserved resting place.

This research examined the impact of giving cash to poor people.  This is a new favorite of the nutsos, which as usual they find a euphemism for, in this case “universal basic income”.  Welfare or handouts would be more accurate.  We have seen for decades the pernicious effects of government programs which give money or services or things to poor people.  Families erode, work ethic disappears, drug and alcohol abuse proliferates.  In this study, some participants got $500, some $2000 and some nothing.  Subsequent financial transactions were tracked for a sub-group and psychological, financial and mental “well-being” was examined.  While people obviously spent more, there was no improvement in any outcomes in either group of cash recipients.  The authors attribute this to just being more aware that they had less money than they needed.  Huh?

The whackos will say that these were one-time payments, and you just have to keep giving more and more.  There is no research to support that either.  And of course to the fantasists, the money being given to these people just comes out of thin air and doesn’t create any work disincentives.  If you saw people just being given money, would you feel like working?  The number one approach missing from today’s public policy is an emphasis on personal responsibility–get an education, get a good job, behave responsibly.  Nope, everyone is some kind of victim who needs social justice, equity and help.  We will all be in the gutter scrounging with the rats for bread crumbs at this rate.  (SSRN Study)

Join the discussion 2 Comments

  • Rob says:

    Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime.

    Of course if fishing were taught by union teachers, it would take twelve years of critical race theory about how finishing poles and fishing nets are racist, followed by 4 years of college with $200k in loans before the student would be able to bait a hook without injuring themselves. And the students would protest that baiting a hook could cause harm and demand safe spaces where baiting hooks would not be required.

  • dell says:

    I wonder how much this applies to Habitat for Humanity?

    I know corporations benefit and taxpayers pay hidden taxes and probably other taxes are shifted (property comes to mind).

    Rehabbing a run down house instantly implies substantial increases in home value and therefore net worth of the new owner. Let’s see. Habitat buys a place for $50,000 gets a lot of free rehabbing.

    It brings the home value up to say $200,000. Who benefits?

    I think they require the prospective home owner to do some work, sweat equity. But sweeping floors and maybe learning to paint a wall doesn’t mean much to me.

    Be interesting to see a financial / economic analysis of the program.

Leave a comment