Zhao says having data on how people who did get the money actually spent it is something she thinks will help counteract stereotypes, increase empathy and potentially get skeptics and the public on board with the idea of providing cash transfers.

Now that the study is complete, the plan is to replicate it and expand it to other cities in Canada and the U.S.

  • mo_ztt ✅
    link
    English
    211 year ago

    It never does.

    Did you miss up above where I asked you for a source for this?

    This whole interaction is hilarious.

    We did a study of what happens when you do X.
    No, that’s wrong. X never works.
    What is your study? Why do you say that? We did a study and it worked.
    Because it is known. X never works.

    Honestly, I would be 100% open to it if you made some kind of argument for why some specific social program is actually making things worse when you study it, because I do think that happens. But, just falling back on thought-terminating cliches like “Welfare never works” and “Democrats only ever have one solution” and refusing to examine them further is not going to bring you any better ability to understand the world, and now you’re over here trying to export those malfunctioning thought patterns to other people, and surprise surprise, they’re not being friendly to your efforts.

    • @Strangle
      link
      -91 year ago

      What solutions do democrats have that don’t end up just as funding?

      • mo_ztt ✅
        link
        English
        131 year ago

        Nice deflection to a different topic. This whole story is about Canada, nothing about the US Democratic party. If for some reason you do want to talk about the effectiveness of “Democratic” fiscal policy versus “Republican” fiscal policy, I’m happy to do that.

        Like I said, I’m actually fine having a good-faith discussion about either one of these topics if you’re into that, but if you’re just interested in tossing little one-sentence quips at me and ignoring relevant things I’m saying or questions that I’m asking, then IDK what the point would be. Surely you can see that, right?

        • @Strangle
          link
          -41 year ago

          Maybe I’m confusing replies, but didn’t the person I’m responding to ask ‘how did the US go wrong’?

            • @Strangle
              link
              -21 year ago

              This lemmy app doesn’t even take me to the right part of the thread the comments are in half the time.

              It’s an absolute mess.

              • mo_ztt ✅
                link
                English
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The core issue isn’t complicated. No advanced Lemmy required. Giving money to people who have none, as a way to make the world better, either (a) works always, or (b) works when done some ways but not others, or (c ) never works. I say the answer is (b) and I’m happy to show sources and studies; to get to the truth of the matter you have to be open to looking at how things play out and examining evidence.

                If you’re planning on saying over and over again that it’s (c ), then you’ve done that! Mission accomplished. If you want to dig a little into the reasons why someone would say one thing or the other, and examining evidence from the real world which might or might not agree with you, we can do that too.

                Edit: (c ) not ©

      • @dogslayeggs
        link
        91 year ago

        I’ve read at least 8 of your posts on this topic. Not one time have you put out any ideas that you think would work. You keep saying that throwing money at it doesn’t work (without any citations) and that democrats are bad. Not once have you put out a different idea or said anything that WOULD help.

        I can tell you from very personal experience that the welfare system does help people and makes lives better. You aren’t interested in that, though. You just have an agenda and will dismiss any story as an anecdote and will dismiss any study as biased or incomplete. You won’t actually link to anything that supports your position or even state a position outside of “welfare bad.”

    • @Strangle
      link
      -10
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What kind of source do you need? Welfare was created to get people on their feet and off of welfare, not for a quasi-UBI program that it’s turned into.

      If welfare was working, you’d see less and less people receiving it. That’s not what’s happening though. There are more people on welfare now than there was 50 years ago.

      The war on poverty has been a failure. Time for a new approach

      Why would I put more than the minimal amount of effort into any post on lemmy, knowing that 100 communist teenagers are just going to reply “lol wrong, you fascist” and downvote?

      If you want to debate me, I’d rather do that in real time on another program like discord. But lemmy is just a left wing commie shithole

      • mo_ztt ✅
        link
        English
        91 year ago

        Hey, substantive statements! Okay, I can rock with this.

        “Welfare” is a very broad term. It can refer to anything from unemployment benefits, to SNAP, to this story about one-time aid specifically for homeless people in Canada (which is very far removed from anything resembling “welfare” as it’s commonly implemented in the US), to section 8 housing or housing assistance, and lots more. There are so many goals and implementation details with varying levels of success that I don’t think it makes sense to apply any kind of blanket logic to the whole collection, let along to apply the logic of “this one-time homeless benefit is welfare -> welfare never works -> end of discussion.”

        Why would I put more than the minimal amount of effort into any post on lemmy, knowing that 100 communist teenagers are just going to reply “lol wrong, you fascist” and downvote?

        Yeah, I 100% agree with this, having been on the receiving end of it myself plenty of times. I don’t think I’m doing that to you in any regard, but I do get the frustration with the overall state of discourse here (including from “the left”) and reluctance to start any kind of real discussion. All I can say is if that bothers you, you gotta be part of the solution instead of starting to do the same thing yourself.

        If you want to debate me, I’d rather do that in real time on another program like discord.

        Lol not interested. You’re on Lemmy, and you said specific things on Lemmy, and I replied. If you’re suddenly not interested in having a discussion on Lemmy, then I won’t try to force you into it I guess.

        • @Strangle
          link
          -11 year ago

          No, I love talking to you. I wish there were more people around here like you.

          I appreciate this discussion. You’ve been a bright spot on lemmy for me, thank you

          • Froyn
            link
            fedilink
            41 year ago

            Can you guys do a comparison between personal welfare and corporate welfare?
            Specifically how Corporations are people, yet the welfare they receive is substantially disproportionate to that given to personal welfare (state/federal programs).

            I’m interested to see the discussion when it comes to throwing money at companies to fix the problems of underpaid workers and profit-driven inflation.

            • athos77
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              Also how corporations intentionally have policies that make the taxpayers subsidize the workers? When you start at Walmart, the first thing they do is tell you how to apply for food stamps. There are a ton of places that arrange things so that you’re never a full-time employee who therefore gets benefits - permanent use of “temps” from “temp agencies”, repeatedly extending “initial probation periods”, setting impossible goals then downgrading hours when they’re not met, simply refusing to ever give 34 hours a week.

            • @Strangle
              link
              -11 year ago

              I don’t agree with that either