Yes, really Kent.

Well, Phil, the article you replied to was mendacious babbling. The trillions of dollars that we have thrown at poor people, since the beginning of the war on poverty, is not “nudging.”

There are baskets, and truckloads, and trillions of cold, hard, cash.

“Basic income” is a nonsensical communist pipe-dream.

When you give trucks full of cash to people with issues, they waste the trucks full of cash on their issues.

Doesn’t matter if you call is “basic income” or crack subsidies.

If cash was the solution to poverty, then every poor person who won the lottery (an instant “basic income” for life!) would magically be a functional member of society. Sadly, poor people who win the lottery are destitute and dysfunctional in a few short years. Without the skills to deal with real life, they are prone to piss it away. They do the same with a smaller amount of money, too.

We have reams and terabytes of data on how throwing money at poverty is not a solution.

We have reams of data about the characteristics of poor people vs. the characteristics of non-poor people. Nothing to do with “Free Cash.”

…the concept behind how we fight poverty is wrong. The vast majority of current programs are focused on making poverty more comfortable — giving poor people more food, better shelter, health care, and so forth — rather than giving people the tools that will help them escape poverty. And we actually have a pretty solid idea of the keys to getting out of and staying out of poverty: (1) finish school; (2) do not get pregnant outside marriage; and (3) get a job, any job, and stick with it.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.