SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Poverty-alleviation programs like food stamps (SNAP), Social Security, and other "welfare" programs are broadly effective at reducing poverty, a new study from University of Chicago researchers found.
The study, performed by researchers Bruce Meyer and Derek Wu, conducted a more comprehensive analysis than most studies, because it used administrative data from the programs' payment records, not just survey data of recipients from the Census Bureau.
[...] For the elderly, Wu said the research found that Social Security benefits "single-handedly slashes poverty by 75%." Social Security's overall effect on all poverty is also enormous, responsible for by far the largest poverty reduction among all these programs, the study said.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Study: Public Assistance Programs Lessen Poverty
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 100 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Everything you know is wrong!
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Entropy on Tuesday May 29 2018, @10:16AM (4 children)
South Africa tried that, and now they are starving. Turns out if you murder the people that are actually producing all the food(aka have land, and assets), then replace them with people from a poverty background the folks don't magically gain the drive and skills to succeed. Instead, you ruin those industries and starve.
Then of course you ask for assistance from the world because poverty.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday May 29 2018, @11:04AM (2 children)
Note that I said
> start selectively culling
and referred to the toxic ones.
The situation in SA is not directly about the toxic ones, it's envy of the wealth accumulated by others no matter how, instigated by the toxic ones.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Osamabobama on Tuesday May 29 2018, @06:45PM (1 child)
The problem is, nobody has culled the right people to make this work. You can't just go around killing people indiscriminately and expect to prosper; you have to kill just the right people in order for it to work.
Okay, so now what? Oh, yeah: make me your leader and I will provide you with the list of names. It will definitely work out better this time.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday May 29 2018, @09:59PM
> You can't just go around killing people indiscriminately
I know, I know, fourth directive and all.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by edIII on Wednesday May 30 2018, @01:37AM
That was South Africa. What you are implying is that large portions of America's workforce couldn't survive without the c-suites protecting us from ourselves, and performing services only they can.
LOL. That's complete utter fucking bullshit. C-suites are not as important, or indispensable, as they think they are. The specific MBA tasks that really need, can honestly, be mostly automated these days. C-suites exist to service the workers actually providing product, not the other way around. One day soon, AI can and will replace a lot of MBA tasks that workers need fulfilled.
In America we really could kill the entire c-suite class, and all of the Elites, and all of the bankers, and we would be just fine. The factories would still exist, the farms would still exist, all that would gone are management tasks. Other than that, all that the c-suites have ever provided us are more and more effective ways to make money. That goal quite often results in quite negative outcomes for the Middle Class, and even worse on the poor and vulnerable. As for the management of great big distribution channels going everywhere, ie the Middle Men, technology can help us there too. The Internet is really fucking amazing, and I'm positive that there is technology that would help us model our needs and predict our demand/supply.
The average level of intelligence in America is still sufficient to kill of the Elites, and still have enough skillsets and experience at the top to meet our needs. The difference being of course, that the new class of managers that will be created will be employee oriented first, and not the toxic modality of shareholder first.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.