probably still better than the groups we're currently wasting our money on though

but that's not really saying much

It's saying a couple hundred billion down the drain though.

It's not clear to me that gibs can ever undo poverty

regardless of the population being served

I think it can, depending on how it's done and significantly on the population.

is there a single example of it working in practice

My sister in law gave me 8 grand. It got my wife and I through some hard times 5 years ago. We're now making 115k a year.

that's not gibs

that's your family helping you once

Idk man, she totally gave it to me.

yes but it's somebody who cares about you

giving you a substantial amount

once

knowing you'd do the right thing with it

Does the person giving it really matter when the point of contention is the plausibility of results?

I sure as shit wouldn't feel comfortable giving my tax money to some druggie in nowhereville KY

The point you asked for was does it ever work? It does work, does it always work? No. Probably fails more than works.

But it can work.

I don't think your example is even remotely relevant to a discussion of government-enforced dysgenic redistribution

It was only relevant to the question you asked.

<:PeepoWeird:684862716430647319>

I don't think you understood my question then

🧑

I was asking if there was ever an example of mass redistribution of wealth by the government uplifting an underclass out of poverty

(there isn't)

Oooooh, so you were asking about uplifting an entire class of people.

Well seeing how communism has never been successful. No

what the fuck else would be the point of giving an entire class of people money

if it's not to help the entire class of people

Why would you do that?

idk you seemed to be the one proposing it

> I am of the mind though, that the amount of money we put into trying to up lift inner cities would have a drastically different and more successful result if we put it into the appalachians or the midwest.

Did I? I thought I was talking about a geographic poverty, not class poverty.

Uplifting geographic poverty seems far more feasible than class poverty.

what does that even mean

Putting wealth into an area decreases poverty, but maintains class structure.

yes but what does that look like practically

Id say the difference between countries, states, counties, and cities. When it comes to examples of it in play. Trade, tariffs, geopolitical wars and alliances. Taxes, public works, subsidized buisnesses, market manipulation/regulation, etc.

In a way, cities leach wealth out of the rural parts of the country. Based resources are harvested in the boonies, manufacture in manufacturing towns and traded in metropolitan mega cities.

What are we talking about?