How government policies hurt the 'Good' poor

If one question defines your view on the success of people it is this one:

How is it that a poor Asian family who came to Canada with nothing from a poor remote Indian/Chinese village can raise children who end up being doctors/lawyers/engineers, while the Canadian poor often stay in generational poverty?

If you're a modern progressive, you simply choose not to answer the question as you are forbidden from thinking culture/values has any impact on the success of  a person.    You think it has to be the level of education or the income of the parents that has the impact.

If you're a person who has reason and values emperical evidence, you realize that values and culture and ways of life are significantly important to how a person lives their life.  Seems almost self-evident does it not?

Yet, our political culture chooses the former of course, focusing entirely on income inequality or level of education.  This has actually had some very negative impacts on the 'Good' poor.  By the 'Good' poor, I mean the poor with good values and culture, who just happen to be poor due to poor education or the luck of life.  Many government policies meant to help 'the poor' actually end up hurting this group.

Let's go through a few of them now:
Banning Credit Scores to determine risk

Auto insurance is based on risk.  The common factors are your history, age, sex, postal code.  Pay close attention to that last one... postal code.  This is where someone lives.  People in 'bad' neighborhood tend to pay higher insurance as there are more accidents, theft...  This results in rich people paying less for auto insurance than poor people.  So what happens if you happen to be a good, decent, responsible poor person living in a 'bad' neighborhood?  What factors could you use to differentiate you from your irresponsible neighbor to lower your rate?

Yes, your credit score is a decent measure of your responsibility.  As good as the other measures the auto insurance companies use.  By preventing the use of the credit score, it prohibits otherwise good people in bad neighborhoods from getting lower rates.  They are treated the same as the rest of the irresponsible people in the bad neighborhood. 

Meanwhile, people who are richer, leave the neighborhood for a good one and pay lower rates.  The greatest undeserved victim in this whole operation is the good, responsible poor person.

Preventing rental discrimination

It is common in most Western societies to have laws preventing land lords from looking for certain kinds of tenants.  While this was originally done for the best intentions... preventing racial discrimination, it has had the adverse affect of segregating neighborhood based on income.

Before such laws, a landlord who wanted  good responsible poor people in their building had the discretion to do so.  This in turn attracted good responsible poor people into such areas.  The result is that you could have poorer areas that were still well kept and in a decent community.  Many of these good responsible poor people or their children would then become middle class and stay in the neighborhood.

With such anti-discrimination rental laws, it has become very hard to form such a community in a poorer area.  The result is the poorer community remains a ghetto.  Shady characters and crime dominate the community.  As soon as people are middle class or wealthy enough, they leave the community.

About the only counter-weight to this has been the cultural community.  Members of heavy cultural communities like Asians and Indians have been able to create their own little areas that others would feel very uncomfortable in, so they manage to keep out people in that sense.

Preventing school choice and independent schools

Very similar to the rental discrimination area is the area of schools.  Going to a 'good' school is at the core of where a family stays.  It is common place these days to actually move entire neighborhoods to be in a 'good' school.

The good responsible working poor are prevented from going to good schools.  They are denied school choice or other policies that would enable them to attend good schools in their area.  Instead they are forced into public schools with all the irresponsible families, causing the school to become a 'bad school'.

This is all done under the guise of anti-segregation.  For our kids to learn together and play together.
And yet, it denies the reality that people segregate based on where they choose to live.  The main impact these policies have is forcing poor kids of all background to go to the same school.  The rich and middle class kids have already moved from the neighborhood to segregate themselves.

Using Inflation

One of the core values of the 'Good' poor is to be thrifty and save.  Unfortunately, most government policies actually punish responsibility like that.  Inflation devalues money and most of the 'good' poor don't have the kind of financial know how to avoid it as some wealthier people might.  Easy credit also means other poor people who might not be so responsible get access to the same money and thus can get cars or houses all the same.

The result is several fold.  A decrease in the incentive to be responsible as a poor person.  A build up in asset prices such as houses due to easy credit preventing the responsible poor person from reaping the rewards of their saving... via a house.  The easy credit also lets the middle class and upper class raise the price of housing to levels unreachable by the responsible poor person.  The result again is more segregation of neighborhoods and forcing all the poor into one area.

It's beginning to seem like government policies actually want to segregate the poor in one area isn't it?
More to come...


Popular posts from this blog

What does it mean to live in a free society?

Post Scarcity Economy

The Niqab is cultural?