It would be convenient if money alone could solve the problem of poverty. As citizens of the modern age, it might make our lives simpler and our consciences clearer if simply increasing the share of our paycheck the government takes to redistribute to others would truly help the poor. The answer to poverty is not that easy.
In the developed world (and in much of the developing world), new government programs are often pitched as the next best hope for alleviating poverty and its symptoms. On paper, it seems that a rechargeable debit card, a steady welfare check, and the ability to have “free” access to medical care simply by standing in line for a while should meet people’s needs. However, research continues to show that humans cannot live by impersonal handouts administered by a bureaucratic system alone.
Nearly a century after economist William Beveridge’s proposed social reforms were enacted in Britain, the problems of poverty that he intended to eliminate still persist, as the costs to maintain the system continue to rise.
Hilary Cottam, a designer seeking to find solutions to poverty around the world, observes that despite its efficiency in spending money, “The welfare state can do little to ease either the anxiety or the material effects that modern poverty produces in our lives.”
In her recent book, Radical Help, Cottam outlines the results of the last decade or so of her work, where she set out to find better ways to alleviate poverty amid the complex labyrinth of social welfare programs in Britain.
Is Welfare Working?
Cottam’s quest began with a single question to social workers across
link.
Connect With Us