The article does have a little empirical data (towards the end):
>In the early 1970s, a large-scale study gave poor people in four cities a so-called "negative income tax," a no-strings-attached payment based on how little money they made. The conclusion: the aid tended to discourage work.
we need to stop all aid to third world countries. not only is the vast majority of the money absorbed by corruption and armed conflict, even the money that gets through doesn't help.
of course, this fails to account for the fact that we want those countries in armed conflict and hanging on our every welfare check because it means we can take their resources for way below market value. can you imagine how expensive things would be if the african nations were organized enough to have business infrastructure?
Comments
The article does have a little empirical data (towards the end):
>In the early 1970s, a large-scale study gave poor people in four cities a so-called "negative income tax," a no-strings-attached payment based on how little money they made. The conclusion: the aid tended to discourage work.
when you subsidize something you get more of it.
we need to stop all aid to third world countries. not only is the vast majority of the money absorbed by corruption and armed conflict, even the money that gets through doesn't help.
of course, this fails to account for the fact that we want those countries in armed conflict and hanging on our every welfare check because it means we can take their resources for way below market value. can you imagine how expensive things would be if the african nations were organized enough to have business infrastructure?
Cheaper?