SUMMARY: This article uses the “surprising” results of Cherokee basic income to take a look at the convention (and conservative) approach to poverty. The author argues, “almost every single anti-poverty effort is supposed to work this exact same way … by increasing so-called human capital … Walk yourself through the process that leads from increasing human capital to decreasing poverty. It goes like this: increasing the human capital of poor people will cause them to have a greater productive capacity, which will cause them to get better jobs, which will cause them to get higher pay, which will cause them to have more money, which will cause them to not be poor anymore. Talking about human capital obscures the mechanism of this conservative approach to poverty reduction, but that mechanism is ultimately increasing the cash incomes of poor people. You cannot consistently believe that 1) increasing human capital will make poor people less poor, and 2) increasing cash transfers will not make poor people less poor.”
Matthew Bruenig
Matt Bruenig is a journalist who write about politics, the economy, and political theory, primarily with a focus on the set of interlocking issues that affect poor and working people. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, The New Republic, The American Prospect, Salon, The Week, Demos’ Policy Shop, Financial Times, New York Times, Washington Post, Reuters, Guardian, Forbes, NY Magazine, Mother Jones, Slate, Washington Monthly, Think Progress, Roosevelt Institute, Dissent Magazine, Jacobin Magazine, and elsewhere. He has lately written several articles on BIG.
Matt Bruenig, “A Cherokee Tribe’s Basic Income Success Story.” Policy Shop, Demos, January 19, 2014
