Sunday Sunday Sunday

Well, it was a mildly busy weekend of getting things in order.  First off, I slept for 14 hours.  That's a goodness.

Lungs are also less frothy, so that's a goodness as well.  I'm such a malingerer.

**

I went over my finances - not quite so good, but not really bad either.  I'm in PD water-treading mode. 

And speaking of things financial, I read an interesting article about poverty in the Globe.  All my freaky Law and Economics friends might find this interesting.  The article discusses the ideas behind Charles Karelis's, "The Persistence of Poverty: Why the Economics of the Well-Off Can't Help the Poor." 

The basic thrust of the argument seems to be that a shift in "economic thinking" (if such a thing actually exists at all) occurs when one is subjected to the myriad problems of poverty.  When the sum of those problems become overwhelming, people experince a disincentive to address any single one of them, as 14 more problems are waiting behind it. 

Thus giving money to the poor (reducing the problems/hardships) is more likely to encourage someone to deal with the last few problems on their own.

It's an interesting argument, one which I think has some ancedotal resonance to the kind of issues I deal with every day.  I have relatively well-off (not financially, but not beset by troubles) clients who want to take control of matters and get things fixed.  I have others who are so swamped by numerous problems that it's hard to get them to stand up for themselves - you haven't seen a defeatist attitude until you deal with someone who insists they're innocent but *wants* to take six months in jail because, "what does it matter anyway."         

**

I had dinner with the still vacationing Mayor and his family, including his new puppy.  That dog has more energy than I've seen.  If you put him in his cage, he quietly rests.  You let him out and he has to sniff everything in the house at once, which means lot of running.  I don't think he knew what to make of me.  He'd run over at me, bark, decide everything was OK, lick my fingers in hello, then jump back a few feet and bark.  This happened 4 times. 

**

I'm getting out of shape.  The decision to get a waffle-maker probably wasn't the wisest one.  Although I will be having a Waffle Evening (tm) with some PD friends.  Wine Waffles and Song - that's all you really need.

Comments

[Atomic]

Ugh. Where do I even start? What cute analogies. It's great that someone from the bastion of free market economics (George Mason) has lukewarmly endorsed his thought. Great that he thought about it from purely a top-down perspective ("government policies changing behaviour"). Actually, this is where we can and should apply the same principles that are used in anti-poverty programmes in developing countries. 1) recognising and analysing decision-making behaviour on the basis of maximising scarce resources as held by the person who is considered poor - if he has 6 bee stings, 1 bandaid needed by his bleeding child and a 3-mile walk to the nearest pharmacy to pay $5 for additional band aids or bactine, what decision will he make? Will it actually matter if he has 1 or 6? 2)anti-poverty programmes will succeed most in areas where the needs and priorities of the targeted community are taken into account, not where there are blanket policies and approaches. Which is why, in areas where back-to-work programmes have recognised the high proportion of single mothers and have responded by incorporating subsidised childcare programmes (granted, they are few) have seen increased uptake than traditional get-off-your-ass-and-get-to-work-or-else programmes. It's about community engagement and recognising their unique needs. As well as the increased health susceptibilities and needs in poorer communities, particularly with regards to mental health. Policies should provide incentives and allow for the inevitable recidivism rate. And recognition that in times of scarcity, individuals are maximising resources according to their perceived needs, as well as costs and benefits. To suggest otherwise actually denigrates the choice of people who are poor as being less than rational or reasonable. We don't need bee stings and dented cars, that's probably as crap as the idea of erasing graffiti to prevent rising crime rates. We need to provide resources as well as incentives, as decided and prioritised by the targeted communities, so that the majority of that population can potentially realise ever-elusive equal opportunites, access quality services that effectively meet their needs and encourage individual and community-based resource maximisation that improves quality of life. Blech, stick a fork in me, I'm done.