Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

news.columbia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 133 posts

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#11

Post by waqf »

grandalf wrote: post #5
argumentum wrote: post #2

This is only "surprising" to those who think they know how other people should live. I've always favored this approach (a minimum income, or negative income tax .. whatever you want to call it) as a replacement to all other forms of welfare. If I am to spend my tax money on those in need, I do not want more than half of it going to upper middle class bureaucrats and middle class administrators.

Exactly, the idea that someone should buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is extremely paternalistic.

The idea that people need to be told to buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is paternalistic, yes.

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#12

Post by code_duck »

waqf wrote: post #11
grandalf wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, the idea that someone should buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is extremely paternalistic.

The idea that people need to be told to buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is paternalistic, yes.

Sadly, some people absolutely need to be told to buy their kid a jacket vs. a large bag of cocaine.

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#13

Post by cjbprime »

milsorgen wrote: post #8
cjbprime wrote: post #3

If you find this persuasive, consider donating to http://www.givedirectly.org/ , which performs unconditional cash transfers to the poorest people in Kenya. Give Directly is the subject of this writeup[1] on GiveWell, and this excellent episode[2] of This American Life. [1]: http://www.givewell.org/international/top-charities/give-dir... [2]: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/503/i...

Are there any similar programs for people in developed countries?

Well, there's http://www.nbcnews.com/business/2-800-month-every-adult-it-c... . I wouldn't donate to it, though -- Switzerland doesn't need the money.

(And if we're performing a comparison, neither do other developed countries compared to the people being targeted by Give Directly's program. We should give to wherever it will do the most good, right?)

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#15

Post by KatherineJMoses »

asperous wrote: post #10

I think the context is super important here. "gave cash to groups of young people so they could learn a trade and start their own businesses." In Uganda. These people were pretty much starving before. “These were mostly farmers who had work 10 to 20 hours a week and earned about $1 a day," With different people, culture, attitudes, environment the effect might be completely different in America, for example.

uptil I looked at the receipt which had said $9272, I didn't believe that my mom in-law woz realie bringing in money in there spare time on there computar.. there friends cousin haz done this 4 only about eighteen months and recently cleard the mortgage on their place and bourt a great opel. additional info ==========================

http://WWW.WORKS23.COM

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#16

Post by zorpner »

grandalf wrote: post #5
argumentum wrote: post #2

This is only "surprising" to those who think they know how other people should live. I've always favored this approach (a minimum income, or negative income tax .. whatever you want to call it) as a replacement to all other forms of welfare. If I am to spend my tax money on those in need, I do not want more than half of it going to upper middle class bureaucrats and middle class administrators.

Exactly, the idea that someone should buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is extremely paternalistic.

Do you object to a specific part of the research methodology in the article, or are you just showing your classism off for fun?

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#17

Post by breischl »

asperous wrote: post #10

I think the context is super important here. "gave cash to groups of young people so they could learn a trade and start their own businesses." In Uganda. These people were pretty much starving before. “These were mostly farmers who had work 10 to 20 hours a week and earned about $1 a day," With different people, culture, attitudes, environment the effect might be completely different in America, for example.

In addition...

To get the cash, applicants had to form a group with others in their village and submit a proposal showing how they planned to use the money

It's not clear how selective they were, but it does sound more involved than just "fill out this form and get your cash." So it's a group of people that were selected, or at least self-selected, for some minimum amount of initiative and ambition.

The title of the article invites comparisons to social safety net programs in the developed world, but this sounds more like a combination of the educational and small business grant programs. It also seems like it would not be broadly applicable - you couldn't just carpet an area with $400 grants and expect the same kind of success rate.

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#18

Post by femto »

code_duck wrote: post #12
waqf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that people need to be told to buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is paternalistic, yes.

Sadly, some people absolutely need to be told to buy their kid a jacket vs. a large bag of cocaine.

The point of the study is that these cases are a minority, and that it works to initially assume that the money will be used to buy a jacket.

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#19

Post by _delirium »

code_duck wrote: post #12
waqf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that people need to be told to buy food for their kid rather than a big screen TV is paternalistic, yes.

Sadly, some people absolutely need to be told to buy their kid a jacket vs. a large bag of cocaine.

I agree! This is why I've long argued that companies should be required to pay a portion of their employees' paychecks in nontransferable vouchers. If parents want to blow their I-Bank or Google paychecks on MacBooks, cocaine, and hookers, after responsibly buying jackets and healthy food for their kids, that's their prerogative. But the first $n0,000 should be paid out in restricted vouchers to make sure they provide for their kids first.

Re: Research Finds Outright Grants of Cash are an Effective Form of Aid to the Poor

#20

Post by ma2rten »

breischl wrote: post #17
asperous wrote: post #10

I think the context is super important here. "gave cash to groups of young people so they could learn a trade and start their own businesses." In Uganda. These people were pretty much starving before. “These were mostly farmers who had work 10 to 20 hours a week and earned about $1 a day," With different people, culture, attitudes, environment the effect might be completely different in America, for example.

In addition... To get the cash, applicants had to form a group with others in their village and submit a proposal showing how they planned to use the money It's not clear how selective they were, but it does sound more involved than just "fill out this form and get your cash." So it's a group of people that were selected, or at least self-selected, for some minimum amount of initiative and ambition. The title of the…

In addition...

The simple fact that someone came after those people to check what they did with their money, for the purpose of the research, probably influenced the result (at least if they knew or suspected that beforehand). If they said they would use the money for business, but then instead spend it alcohol and gambling, that would be very embarrassing.

If on the other hand, a program like exists this for a long time and everyone knows nobody will check what you do with the money, abuse would become very likely, imo.

Post reply on HN