Keeping books on social aid is capitalistic nonsense. I just use the money for the poor. I can't stop to count it.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I wish we questioned the aid model as much as we are questioning the capitalism model. Sometimes the most generous thing you can do is just say no.
It would be nice if the poor were to get even half of the money that is spent in studying them.
The belief that recipients of government aid are better off the more we spend on them is remarkably persistent. No matter how many times this central tenet of liberalism gets debunked, like Brett Favre, it just keeps coming back.
The issue I highlight in the book is welfare reform.
My books are very few, but then the world is before me - a library open to all - from which poverty of purse cannot exclude me - in which the meanest and most paltry volume is sure to furnish something to amuse, if not to instruct and improve.
Pell Grants aren't 'welfare,' they are a gateway to opportunity for some of our nation's best and brightest students.
There are writers who say they have no social responsibility except to write a good book, but that doesn't satisfy me.
Most philanthropists want to be effective altruists. But the problem isn't intention: it's measurement. Unlike financial investing, which has reporting standards, audit processes, and educational requirements, social investing is notoriously tricky to evaluate.
We spend billions on international aid annually, but we don't find ways to connect people to dignified work. I realized that if we don't think about ways to harness private capital to solve problems, we're leaving large amounts of money on the table and doing ourselves a disservice.
We need to have the social investments by which to quote unquote distribute some of that wealth.