3 thoughts on “Free stuff isn’t the answer to poverty”

  1. Posted 27/06/2018 at 16:07 | Permalink

    The Institute for Global Prosperity may be grandly titled but at least we know how it is funded, in stark contrast to the IEA. Len Shackleton is yet another mysteriously funded and sheltered IEA academic, with no understanding, expertise or experience of the social issues he discusses. In contrast, the IGP has strong links to grassroots workers. Shackleton’s comments about period poverty and mention of Ascot are ignorant, crass and shallow – so typical of the IEA, staffed as it by trust fund kids.

  2. Posted 28/06/2018 at 09:19 | Permalink

    @Fabian – You are good at throwing insults at Len Shackleton but your post contains no critique of his arguments. His point is an entirely sensible one – if you simply give out things free, then everyone will take advantage of this, not just the needy. This reduces the amount of money available to help the really needy, which could be done much better by giving them them to money to spend on their priorities.

  3. Posted 28/06/2018 at 09:59 | Permalink

    I am not ‘mysteriously funded’. My details are all in the public domain, unlike ‘Fabian’. Anybody is entitled to the view that I lack understanding and expertise, and am crass and shallow. We all have our faults. However Fabian says absolutely nothing to refute my contention, shared by many professional economists, that providing goods for free is a wasteful and inefficient way to tackle the genuine problem of poverty.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.