Our Malcolm Gladwell (yes, yes, but apart from the recent hype he's always been good), to the point that almost all the major expense of homeless people is run up by a few, so that it would be far more efficient to simply give them homes. As is being tried...likewise bad cops & bad polluters.

One interesting angle is the way this opposes moral intuitions of fairness & equality against efficiency -- and managing problems against ending them.

Reminds me of Eliza Doolittle's dad in My Fair Lady.

The only part where, for me, it falls down somewhat is on the pollution side--sure, dealing with the few vehicles with extra-heavy emissions would have a disproportionate effect, and that would be nice for what it was worth, but ultimately sheer numbers and basic technology are bigger issues.

Edited to add: And I agree with Pogo. Neocons don't see that it's cheaper to help people at the outset rather than doing damage control after the fact. (And they don't care that it's more humane.)

[ 15 February 2006: Message edited by: Sineed ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
We would also save on incarceration costs: apartments are cheaper than jail.

Edited to add: And I agree with Pogo. Neocons don't see that it's cheaper to help people at the outset rather than doing damage control after the fact. (And they don't care that it's more humane.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boarsbreath:
Doolittle's dad?

---

He was one of the "undeserving poor". Played by the inimitable Stanley Holloway, who also did such classic bits as "With 'er 'ead Tucked Underneath 'er Arm" (a comic song about the ghost of Anne Boleyn) and "Albert and the Lion".

quote:

---

Higgins:You mean to say you'd sell your daughter for fifty pounds?
Colonel Hugh Pickering: Have you NO morals, man?
Alfred P. Doolittle: Nah. Can't afford none. Neither could you, if you were as poor as me. Not that I mean any 'arm, mind you, but if Eliza's getting a bit out of this, why not me too? Eh? Why not? Well, look at it my way - what am I? I ask you, what am I? I'm one of the undeserving poor, that's what I am. Now think what that means to a man. It means that he's up against middle-class morality for all of time. If there's anything going, and I puts in for a bit of it, it's always the same story: "you're undeserving, so you can't have it." But my needs is as great as the most deserving widows that ever got money out of six different charities in one week for the death of the same 'usband. I don't need less than a deserving man, I need more! I don't eat less 'earty than 'e does, and I drink, oh, a lot more. I'm playin' straight with you. I ain't pretendin' to be deserving. No, I'm undeserving. And I mean to go on being undeserving. I like it and that's the truth. But, will you take advantage of a man's nature to do 'im out of the price of 'is own daughter what he's brought up, fed and clothed by the sweat of 'is brow till she's growed big enough to be interesting to you two gentlemen? Well, is five pounds unreasonable? I'll put it to you, and I'll leave it to you.

---

I believe Higgins gave him a tenner, but was so fascinated by his philosophy that he got him a lecture tour.

[ 16 February 2006: Message edited by: Rufus Polson ]

quote:

---

...they grow up hungry and with learning disabilities...

---

I read this to mean that hunger leads to learning disabilities. I'm not sure that that's true although I wouldn't have trouble accepting the idea that hunger leads to difficulties in learning as well as social marginalization (which may also lead to difficulties in learning).

He grew up poor and was often placed in unstable foster homes. He also got bullied at school, as I recall. Anyway, his life is a textbook case on how to permanently fuck up someone's brain as far as being able to do more than subsist on disability payments and getting screwed by the government while doing that (his caseworkers often make him jump through hoops to keep his disability, even though it's clear he can't hold a job because even something like working a cash register is hard for him to do thanks to his poor ability with numbers).

Nice article, it's a shame that this seldom makes it into the ideas promoted by the right-wingers who like to promote their "expertise" about prosperity.

They somehow seem to *miss* the high costs of police, courts, jails, and so on when promoting their social ideologies, as well as missing the benefits of an educated populance with a fair distribution of wealth for the overall health, wealth, and security of any given society. Reeks of communism, they say...

It also seems to me that insofar as the government actively tries to keep a certain percentage of their citizens unemployed or underemployed (via NAIRU*, as currently happens in Canada and the US), they should also be compelled to compensate the unemployed for the emotional duress caused by this, as well as compensating others harmed by the effects of crime, family breakdown, increased usage of the medical system, etc. I would even include in this those forced to work in dead-end minimum wage jobs, as these jobs are also promoted by the adherence to NAIRU theory by those who control our economic policy**.

For some theories of what a future with a reasonable monetary system and near-full employment might look like, this might be an interesting source (with the same disclaimer as above, and appologies for the uninformed comments by others on the same thread)

* To understand what NAIRU refers to, google "site:rabble.ca nairu Mr. Anonymous" (sorry if it seems like I am blowing my own horn here, but much of the stuff returned by googling NAIRU alone is technical and IMO not to informative to the average reader)

** to gain a better understanding of this, see the Money Masters video sold through http://www.themoneymasters.com/

For a discussion of some of the solutions proposed by the video, see:
http://www.themoneymasters.com/article.htm
or the reviews at
http://www.themoneymasters.com/viewcim.html
including this one by Milton Friedman:

"As you know, I am entirely sympathetic with the objectives of your Monetary Reform Act...You deserve a great deal of credit for carrying through so thoroughly on your own conception…I am impressed by your persistence and attention to detail in your successive revisions... Best wishes. Milton Friedman," Nobel Laureate in Economics; Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace

[ 18 February 2006: Message edited by: Mr. Anonymous ]