Three common distortions about poverty

It is true, as a Century editorial recently argued, that poverty did not get the attention it deserved in the presidential campaign. Even more frustrating are the comments often made about poverty and social program when they do come up. Let’s look at three common distortions.

More poverty equals better incentives for workers to seek jobs. This is a common underlying assumption when you hear people argue to eliminate anti-poverty programs. University of Chicago economics professor Casey Mulligan has recently argued that Obama Administration policies intended to alleviate suffering caused by the recession have in fact “sharply” eroded “the incentives for workers to seek and retain jobs, and for employers to create jobs or avoid layoffs.”

This is a twisted logic premised on the idea that people prefer getting food stamps to working. If the richest country in the world would just let more of its people go hungry, we would have a better-motivated workforce that could solve our economic problems all by itself. But motivation is not exactly the central problem.