While the ability of cash payments to reduce hardship might seem obvious, Mr. Shaefer pointed out that critics of such aid often warn that the needy might waste it. He argued that the size, speed and variety of the hardship reductions vindicated the use of broad cash relief. While other forms of pandemic aid have been better targeted, some have taken many months to distribute and can be used only for dedicated purposes like food or housing.
Giving people money during a global public health crisis that has caused enormous damage to the world economy, so they can at least afford the basics for themselves and their families, reduced...
This seems dismissive? Yes, it’s unsurprising, but the point of doing a study is to check that something counterintuitive didn’t happen and to see how big the effect was.
This seems dismissive? Yes, it’s unsurprising, but the point of doing a study is to check that something counterintuitive didn’t happen and to see how big the effect was.
It was dismissive, yes. That was my first reaction to the article, because it seemed obvious to me that giving folks some relief money during a time like this would've reduced hardship in many...
It was dismissive, yes. That was my first reaction to the article, because it seemed obvious to me that giving folks some relief money during a time like this would've reduced hardship in many ways. That being said, you're right about the point of such a study. Especially when one of the arguments against giving people aid in cash is that it would make them lazy or something. So yes, fair point.
From the article:
Here is the study. (PDF)
Giving people money during a global public health crisis that has caused enormous damage to the world economy, so they can at least afford the basics for themselves and their families, reduced hardship.
This seems dismissive? Yes, it’s unsurprising, but the point of doing a study is to check that something counterintuitive didn’t happen and to see how big the effect was.
It was dismissive, yes. That was my first reaction to the article, because it seemed obvious to me that giving folks some relief money during a time like this would've reduced hardship in many ways. That being said, you're right about the point of such a study. Especially when one of the arguments against giving people aid in cash is that it would make them lazy or something. So yes, fair point.