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

Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#21

Post by frank_boyd »

ekianjo wrote: post #5
frank_boyd wrote: post #2

As a matter of fact, society has not a single valid reason to allow concentration of excessive wealth on some kind of restricted group or "elite" (as, by the way, also promoted erroneously by the idea of the "American Dream"). Here are a few facts to explain that this concept is not sane at all: - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating…

> - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating jobs, etc.), you need to make money circulate as much as possible (which is not what rich people usually do). Another economical fallacy. When you put money in the bank, it's not standing there doing nothing. Savings are invested, loaned, used to create additional value. That's why banks want y…

> Nature is unfair.

And some people really want it to stay that way.

I read somewhere that we were all born with the same rights. It's still a joke, a few centuries after someone had understood that:

Money equals power. Power equals rights (in our society, until now).

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#22

Post by worldsayshi »

ekianjo wrote: post #5
frank_boyd wrote: post #2

As a matter of fact, society has not a single valid reason to allow concentration of excessive wealth on some kind of restricted group or "elite" (as, by the way, also promoted erroneously by the idea of the "American Dream"). Here are a few facts to explain that this concept is not sane at all: - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating…

> - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating jobs, etc.), you need to make money circulate as much as possible (which is not what rich people usually do). Another economical fallacy. When you put money in the bank, it's not standing there doing nothing. Savings are invested, loaned, used to create additional value. That's why banks want y…

> Nature is unfair.

That is no argument against striving for an as fair society as possible.

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#23

Post by boomlinde »

ekianjo wrote: post #5
frank_boyd wrote: post #2

As a matter of fact, society has not a single valid reason to allow concentration of excessive wealth on some kind of restricted group or "elite" (as, by the way, also promoted erroneously by the idea of the "American Dream"). Here are a few facts to explain that this concept is not sane at all: - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating…

> - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating jobs, etc.), you need to make money circulate as much as possible (which is not what rich people usually do). Another economical fallacy. When you put money in the bank, it's not standing there doing nothing. Savings are invested, loaned, used to create additional value. That's why banks want y…

> Nature is unfair. [...] The only thing society should do is ensure everyone has the same rights in regard to the Law no matter how rich, how poor, how different you may be.

Since you are so readily dismissing egalitarianism on the basis of being unnatural, I'm sure you have a great natural explanation for things like property rights and law.

For all I care, you can have libertarian or egalitarian ideals, but make no mistake in thinking that either of them are natural. If the point of a government or rule of law was to keep the natural order of things, we wouldn't need it at all. Not that I think that being unnatural is inherently bad, but don't try to put yourself on some sort of high ground by saying that your economical philosophy adheres to some sort of natural fact if it doesn't.

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#24

Post by nikatwork »

joelrunyon wrote: post #14
georgemcbay wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nature may be unfair, but it is way more fair than modern wealth distribution. The richest 300 people in the world have more money combined than the poorest 3 billion people. You don't see deviances like that in genetics. Also, if you believe all Americans (also applies to all other nationalities) have the same rights in regard to the law, well I don't even know how to respond to that, because believing that would ma…

> You don't see deviances like that in genetics. You don't? You don't think Lebron James is better than about a billion people at the game of basketball? This is the 80/20 rule niched down about 10x.

To use your metaphor, one player is given 300 free shots while everyone else only has one. And if you don't sink enough baskets, you starve. Also don't call in sick for a game, nobody cares.

I don't understand why HN is so strongly anti- corporate and govt monopoly and yet so massively pro-personal monopoly.

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#25

Post by [deleted] »

joelrunyon wrote: post #14
georgemcbay wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nature may be unfair, but it is way more fair than modern wealth distribution. The richest 300 people in the world have more money combined than the poorest 3 billion people. You don't see deviances like that in genetics. Also, if you believe all Americans (also applies to all other nationalities) have the same rights in regard to the law, well I don't even know how to respond to that, because believing that would ma…

> You don't see deviances like that in genetics. You don't? You don't think Lebron James is better than about a billion people at the game of basketball? This is the 80/20 rule niched down about 10x.

[deleted]

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#26

Post by venomsnake »

frank_boyd wrote: post #2

As a matter of fact, society has not a single valid reason to allow concentration of excessive wealth on some kind of restricted group or "elite" (as, by the way, also promoted erroneously by the idea of the "American Dream"). Here are a few facts to explain that this concept is not sane at all: - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating…

The real problem is not excessive wealth but generational transfer of such. Let someone reap the benefits. BUT then take away the majority of the wealth away upon death so he could not transfer it. Let his decendands be able to inherit total value of 100 each (whatever the poverty line is that year) and take away the rest.

This way we make the emerging of elites harder and falling out of them easier.

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#27

Post by boomlinde »

robryan wrote: post #10
quink wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So no one has the right to, for example, clean water? Or is that just egalitarian bullshit that is going to make everyone the same in every aspect too?

Governments exist to give everyone a basic set required services. I think even the biggest free market/ small government advocate would agree that access to clean drinking water is one of those services.

If you dismiss some things the government provides as being unnatural, you are drawing a very crooked line of "naturality" if you somehow manage to include clean drinking water.

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#28

Post by ekianjo »

worldsayshi wrote: post #22
ekianjo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating jobs, etc.), you need to make money circulate as much as possible (which is not what rich people usually do). Another economical fallacy. When you put money in the bank, it's not standing there doing nothing. Savings are invested, loaned, used to create additional value. That's why banks want y…

> Nature is unfair. That is no argument against striving for an as fair society as possible.

> as fair society as possible

The problem with this line of thought is that it's never ending if you try to "fix things" for everyone. Because there's limited resources and there are choices you have to take anyway and the solutions you will implement will never end up being fair for everyone, while it will prove to be a burden for society as a whole.

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#29

Post by rjtavares »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #13

Would this reduce administration cost also? We always hear of charities where 20 cents on the dollar actually makes it to the people. If this can reduce admin cost by not having to make, control or follow up on conditions it could really help more money get to where it is needed.

Yes, that's one of the main advantages. Also an advantage is that no money is lost dealing with the corruption that is so rampant in many underdeveloped countries.

There's a great Planet Money/This American Life episode about this topic:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/08/16/212645252/episode-...

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/503/i...

Re: Cash to the poor: Giving money directly works surprisingly well

#30

Post by ekianjo »

frank_boyd wrote: post #21
ekianjo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Excessive wealth is usually hoarded (in bank accounts), not used: But if you want the economy to work the most (creating jobs, etc.), you need to make money circulate as much as possible (which is not what rich people usually do). Another economical fallacy. When you put money in the bank, it's not standing there doing nothing. Savings are invested, loaned, used to create additional value. That's why banks want y…

> Nature is unfair. And some people really want it to stay that way. I read somewhere that we were all born with the same rights. It's still a joke, a few centuries after someone had understood that: Money equals power. Power equals rights (in our society, until now).

As far as I know there are still powerful people ending up in prison (at least in the US) once in a while, which seems to go against your last point. If Money equalled power then Madoff would never have landed in prison with a 150 years sentence.
Post reply on HN