SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 7 submissions in the queue.
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This discussion has been archived.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.
Troubled day for virgins over 16 who are beautiful and wealthy and live
in eucalyptus trees.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Wednesday May 30 2018, @02:07AM (1 child)
Not sure why this is modded troll.
It should be, IMHO, modded '+1 Informative' as it provides (with references) a look at how Christians in the US view poverty and lack of opportunity.
The US, since even before its founding has had large numbers (starting with the Puritans [wikipedia.org]) of Christians (mostly protestants) who view poverty as a sign of moral failing. What's more, many Christians believe that wealth is a consequence of their faith [wikipedia.org].
This view was examined by Max Weber in The Protestant Ethic And The Spirit of Capitalism [wikipedia.org] in the early 20th century.
This idea was long embodied in vagrancy laws [wikipedia.org] and the poor quality of essential services, poor quality education and other incredibly regressive and punitive public policies, many of which continue to this day.
The idea that the rich are more deserving, moral and just plain *better* than the poor is deeply rooted in American religious and civic traditions.
There are arguments on both sides of the idea that the poor are that way because they deserve to be poor, vis a vis the idea that poverty is primarily a result of societal and economic structures and policies.
An interesting discussion about this can be found here:
http://www.apuritansmind.com/stewardship/rykenlelandpuritansandmoney/ [apuritansmind.com]
Another discussion gives examples of how this really isn't the case:
http://www.mourningmail.com/posts/580 [mourningmail.com]
As well as discussion as to how this idea is true:
https://www.slayerment.com/poor-people-choose-be-poor [slayerment.com]
Perhaps AC used some hyperbole in their (IMHO) satirical treatment of the connection between religious righteousness and wealth.
Apparently, satire is (at least on SN) not appreciated.
Methinks Jonathan Swift [gutenberg.org] would be disappointed in you troll modders.
Just a little food for thought if you actually care to think.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Informative) by VanessaE on Wednesday May 30 2018, @03:26AM
....which is why the fundies who follow that crap can go fuck themselves with a rusty flagpole, no lube.
I'm poor, though I don't look it because I'm careful with how I spend my money, but I will not hesitate to say that I'm a good person. I'll just leave it at that.
No, G*d doesn't foist poverty on people. The rich do that by controlling access to all the resources they can, and the true dregs of society handle the rest by just shoving the poor out of sight as much as possible.