Re:65k fake students applied for financial aid in wide commu...
by rbanffy on Wednesday September 01, 2021 @01:48PM
(#28383226)
> What do you mean by saying punishing them?
Taking agency away from them, by forbidding behavior you deem inappropriate.
The most effective programs are the conditional cash transfer ones and they are extremely successful in bootstrapping families out of poverty even in the poorest places of the poorest countries, right? For the Brazilian one I am most familiar with, it was estimated that for every dollar invested in it, 2.5 would return to the government as taxes in 10 years.
Re:65k fake students applied for financial aid in wide commu...
by betwixthewires on Wednesday September 01, 2021 @03:32PM
(#28384559)
Nobody is forbidding behavior they deem inappropriate, they're refusing to finance behavior they deem inappropriate, big difference. And by "deem inappropriate" we don't just mean "dislike it", we mean "not within the scope of the stated reason you requested this money in the first place." "You can't buy lottery tickets with food stamps" is not the same as "you're not allowed to play lottery if you're on food stamps" and it's not the same as disallowing e.g sex out of wedlock while on food stamps.
Re:65k fake students applied for financial aid in wide commu...
by sokoloff on Wednesday September 01, 2021 @06:55PM
(#28386547)
Though I don’t find myself in agreement with this position, this is a particularly clear and well-articulated statement of the position. Upvoted for clarity of thinking and communication.
It's everyone's best interest to make sure that they get on board of a better life as quickly as possible. You spread the money on multiple fronts, it just slows down and wastes the money.
For sure we can debate what's "essential" but I really don't think cigarettes and alchohols are among them, unless stapled by a medical doctor.