Transferable film tax credits allow companies to SELL tax credits to other companies

Sure. Much harder to focus on studying etc. when you're starving and worried about where your next meal is going to come from.

Such kids would be more likely to turn to the streets, get involved in crime, drug dealing etc. to try to get money/food etc.

And, as usual, you're just focusing on one minor point at hand rather than the big picture. I don't think anyone would argue that just giving $2,500 to poor families will make much of a difference. It's just a small help in affording food etc. But solving the problems of disadvantaged communities will require wide scale investment and intervention in these areas. Not just throwing money at individual families.

Improve housing and get businesses to invest in these areas (without displacing poor residents to other ghetto areas). Improve schools. Expand social services to address problems like broken homes, abusive/neglectful parenting, teenage pregnancy, STDs, substance abuse prevention, end the war on drugs (which breaks a lot of homes with incarcerated parents) etc. that have destroyed these communities over the past 50+ years. Etc.
 
People who received assistance as children some times grow up in to people who want to deny assistance to children. This is not bootstrappy this is pulling the ladder up behind you.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']And, as usual, you're just focusing on one minor point at hand rather than the big picture. I don't think anyone would argue that just giving $2,500 to poor families will make much of a difference. It's just a small help in affording food etc. But solving the problems of disadvantaged communities will require wide scale investment and intervention in these areas. Not just throwing money at individual families.[/QUOTE]

This.

Blindly throwing $2,500 at someone - just because they have a kid (which goes completely against what was said earlier in this topic, but we've established is the case) isn't going to make major changes. Instead, why not pool that money and make an actual investment into the community? 100 families over the course of ten years - $2,500,000-$5,000,000. There's some money. How much more useful would that chunk of money be for a community (assuming they put it to good use) vs. randomly throwing the money in the street and hoping the people who scoop it up put it to good use?
 
Can't disagree with that. There are better ways to make sure kids stay fed, clothed and sheltered than just throwing money at poor families (food stamps, housing/clothing vouchers etc.).

The biggest problem with social services in this country isn't the amount spent. It's that not enough is aimed at actually fixing the underlying problems leading to multi-generational poverty and letting many inner-city and rural areas become plagued with decades of concentrated disadvantage. Even at the individual level to much is just providing financial assistance while doing little to nothing to help the person become self sufficient (required education or job training, job placement etc.).
 
That's been one of my contentions of how social services are handled in this country (and I've made the comment before of "general welfare" vs. "individual welfare".) The dollar amount isn't the biggest concern I have - it's the application of the money.

But, alas, so long as people try to frame not giving $2,500 to a family as trying to starve children, we'll never be able to make real change in this direction.
 
Again though, it's not an either/or.

We do need to make sure families get sufficient money/vouchers to feed, clothe and shelter their families. And that should be the top priority.

However, we shouldn't be happy with doing that and should be just as focused on getting such families out of poverty and fixing the structural factors that lead to areas being plagued by concentrated disadvantage and multi-generational poverty.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Again though, it's not an either/or.[/QUOTE]

To some extent, however, it is.

There's only so many resources to go around. Do we focus them on short-term "solutions" or long-term solutions>
 
You increase resources by wasting less on things like defense and do both. You can't have kids starving and falling into lives of crime etc. while implementing long-term solutions that will have no impact on their generation.

And yes, social mobility is atrocious in this country. Just read something in one of the major newspapers the other day showing data on how mobility from the lower class is lower in the US than in lots of European and Asian countries.
 
[quote name='Msut77']There is surprisingly little social mobility in this country. It has been well documented over the long term.[/QUOTE]
And according to the gentleman who was on National Socialist Radio earlier today, it's been on decline since the 80s.

Color me shocked.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']You increase resources by wasting less on things like defense and do both. You can't have kids starving and falling into lives of crime etc. while implementing long-term solutions that will have no impact on their generation.[/QUOTE]

When we elect those into power that are willing to cut into the IMC, then we can discuss doing both...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top