An issue that comes up over, and over, and over in policy discussions is that it's super hard to eliminate deep poverty. But it really isn't. It's just hard to eliminate it *via indirect action*. https://twitter.com/BenPhillips_ANU/status/1299498277885231104

If someone can't afford to fead themselves or their family, or keep a roof over their head, literally giving them food and a place to live for free — or the money to buy those things themselves — works in a an obvious, measurable way.

This is often conflated with the idea of broad societal wealth/income inequality — i.e., "some people will always make and have more than others, there's no way to change that."

But that's a very different problem. This is about *ensuring being at the bottom doesn't kill you*.

Another objection is that we can't simply "give people money" becaus there isn't enough to go around.

That isn't how economies work, though. Distributing tax dollars and giving tax cuts are fiscally equivalent within reasonable bounds. What matters is their effect.

And we know that funds in the hands of people at the very bottom of the income/wealth scale *immediately* get spent on food, shelter, and similar necessities; that is money flowing *to* businesses, keeping other people employed, etc.

The overall economic benefit of $1 given to people in deep poverty is many times greater than $1 given to (say) an investor or a business owner or, generally, someone who's economically comfortable.

The *real* point of disagreement that drives opposition to direct-assistance programs is whether eliminating deep poverty is desirable or necessary for a just society.

If you believe some percentage of the population living in abject poverty and dying from its effects is an acceptable part of the way things work, or even that the threat of that is what keeps people "productive," then no numbers will convince you that direct assistance "works."

Because the disagreement isn't about *what works* but rather *what kind of civilization we want*. Having different goals is everyone's right, but it's important to be honest about it, rather than pretending it's just about efficacy.