| That's one theory. The evidence doesn't support it. Maybe the rich guy can get back to where he was with his track record and connections to build on (more likely if he earned the money in the first place rather than inheriting it), and of course if you just take cash and not other sources of wealth you probably haven't hurt the rich guy all that much. But when we have given money to poor people, they use it to improve their lives. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Column+Want+help+poor+... "In Dauphin, Man., the government gave more than 1,000 families a four-year guaranteed income to help keep them out of poverty. Crime rates and hospital visits dropped. Education enrolment surged. Nobody sat around in sweatpants eating Cheetos. They used the extra resources to make plans. " Focused on children: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/18/what-happens... "But just four years after the supplements began, Professor Costello observed marked improvements among those who moved out of poverty. The frequency of behavioral problems declined by 40 percent, nearly reaching the risk of children who had never been poor." Rural poverty in Kenya: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-25/want-to-figh... "Food consumption increased 20 percent, with a 42 percent reduction in the number of days children go without food. Recipients were also able to increase their ability to earn income. Revenue from raising livestock rose by 48 percent; total revenue from self-employment rose by 38 percent." Again, for emphasis: total revenue from self-employment rose And lastly, a large one-time payment to long-term homeless men in London (though an unfortunately small sample size):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/free-money-might-be-t... "A year later, 11 of the 13 had roofs over their heads. (Some went to hostels; others to shelters.) They enrolled in classes, learned how to cook, got treatment for drug abuse and made plans for the future." You need to update your model of how people work. |