Cash Is Turning Out to Be the Most Effective Welfare | For too long people in need have been stereotyped as lazy and dependent. Cash payments give them the breathing room to chart a better life course.

Read the Story

Show Top Comments

The survival constraint. A state welfare allows more people to take risks and fail. Socialising risk is generally good for an economy because it allows the pitfalls of capitalism to be spread across a large population. Currently a huge issue is a select group of people get the socialisation of risk while others do not, which further fuels inequality even outside the cantillion effect of who controls the money supply. A UBI covers both bases a little bit better then current systems we have.

fremeer

The older I get, the more I lean toward just giving people cash instead of these overly complicated bureaucratic social programs.

WideSmilesAbound

Welfare is deeply flawed because of the intense bureaucracy and “cliffs” that are formed as people lose benefits if they take on more work or get promoted. With cash transfers, you cut out these negatives and allow people to do whatever. “Whatever” often means car repairs, cell phone bills, helping friends/family, and buying food. I can’t recommend season 1 of the podcast the Uncertain Hour enough. It’s all about the pitfalls of welfare. The obvious fix to these flaws is basic income/cash transfers. Americans are about to get a big leg up with all this stimulus money.

askoshbetter

But money doesn’t buy happiness.. “id like to see you live without it.”

danvandamns

I feel like money for those in need is a good idea – a strong safety net – I’d be an advocate that if people lose their jobs they get a benefit that is extra strong enough to ensure they aren’t worried about losing their homes and feeding kids. I think most people worry about the long term unemployed however. In my block there are working families on tax credits, full time employed homeowners and some long-term unemployed. I feel that to make the system fair, the benefits and housing allocation should taper down to a minimum acceptable level to encourage people to work. I know some of the long term unemployed literally on the bottom floor of the block and apart from apathy, their worry is that if they go get a job, the benefits will be cut down – so it pays not to work on a very low wage. They also don’t want to lose their housing. I don’t think the system works well for those in short term need, or those who pay taxes like the rest of us, especially when there is a shortage of housing near work centres.

hisky0