Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

WhiskeyGrinder

(25,689 posts)
10. .
Tue Sep 16, 2025, 09:30 AM
Tuesday
HOWEVER, does anyone really believe that $7,500 is going to save a baby from poverty?
Poverty isn't an income level or certain physical markers. It's a constant grind of low-level demands that at some point you simply can't meet and then get swamped under. Adding a person to a household is hugely destabilizing, and easing the disruption has ripple effects even after the payments end. In one analysis, they found that no low-income families who participated in this program were evicted after childbirth. That's enormous.

Pediatrician Mona Hanna is being quite short-sighted if she thinks that once the formula is ingested, the diapers are discarded, and the crib is outgrown, the poverty has been solved. You don't "prescribe away poverty” with $7,500. It helps, but it solves nothing IMO.
The goal isn't to "solve" poverty. It's to ease the disruption that happens to every family after childbirth -- lost wages, childcare costs, physical demands. Because this country insists on patchwork aid for people in need rather than universal services, we do what we can. This is a large and helpful patch in the work.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The US town that pays eve...»Reply #10