[pickdenis]

> And when deciding whether to gift a low-income individual either a $100 grocery voucher or a $200 electronics voucher, only a quarter of participants went for the latter, even though it was worth twice as much. More than half said they would give a high-income individual the electronics voucher, however. “Paradoxically, the result was that participants effectively allocated more money to higher-income people than lower-income people,” the authors note.

This is a ridiculous contrived situation. $100 for a lower Maslow-level need or $200 for a higher level need? Why was giving $200 for the lower level need not an option? Maybe I'm missing the point here, but all this proves is that people are aware of Maslow's hierarchy.

When you create such strange scenarios, expect strange results. If a person struggling financially is servicing their higher level needs before their lower level needs are met, they deserve scrutiny.

[boomboomsubban]

It just says the person has a low paying job, it doesn't say they are struggling financially. People know that food is more important, but if you already have enough for food the $100 grocery gift card just becomes a $100 you can spend on "luxury" goods.