[praetorian84]

Interesting comment below the article regarding a government-run programme in Brazil trying something similar: "However, there is a trend of the part of these persons become dependent of this benefit and do not strive to change this situation..."

That was my immediate reaction after reading this. What about after the twelve years, when the donors ride off into the sunset? There are some encouraging stories there of participants using the money wisely, but not all will do so. You could argue that nobody is forcing them to participate, but it does seem at least a little ethically questionable. Particularly given the targeted demographic of a rural Kenyan community with (presumably - I could be wrong) low education levels.

[PeterStuer]

If this solves their basic needs, housing, food, medical, education, ..., then why would they need to 'strive for change"? Seems to me the world would be a far better place if people could get more content with just living. We have no shortage of produce already, and that is before the automation revolutions coming in the next decades. Just living without exponential 'wealth' accumulation plans that invariably seem to include some form of over-exploiting natural resources while externalizing the effects, or rent-seeking schemes that create lopsided distributions, seems to be a far more 'civil' future.