8704 Yates Dr., Suite 205

Westminster, CO 80031

rmfc.org

303-292-1800

How to Really Help the Poor

It is not enough to want to help the poor. We must help them in the right way to avoid doing them harm. We think we are doing the right thing. We think that if we pass laws to raise their wages and lower their rent; if we give generously to help support mothers without husbands and children without fathers, we can aid the poor in their flight from poverty and relieve much of their distress. According to Michael Bauman, Professor of Theology and Culture at Hillsdale College, we are wrong. We forget that good intentions are not enough, and that massive government programs carry unintended consequences. For example, according to Bauman, we think that if we pass laws mandating higher wages for the lowest paid workers, we can increase their income. We forget that the lowest paid workers are normally those with the least skill and experience and that in the marketplace they are the least desirable of all workers. By artificially elevating their wages, we make it increasingly unlikely that employers will hire more workers.

Imagine if Congress tried to prop up the weakest Detroit car manufacturer by passing a law that put a minimum purchase price of $35,000 on each vehicle it sold. This would dramatically increase the profits it received from every sale. But despite our good intentions, that manufacturer would soon go out of business, because not that many people can afford a $35,000 car. Artificially high wages result in less hiring by employers, not more. Rather than minimum wage subsidies, the government should reward entrepreneurship. The founders of McDonald's and Wendy's understand that you cannot climb the ladder of success without first getting on the ladder. Many poor people started working in entry-level jobs and worked their way up to becoming entrepreneurs themselves. These entry-level jobs teach critical lessons, such as the importance of appearance, punctuality, leadership, teamwork, integrity and dependability. A hand out is not the answer for poverty in America; a hand up to help others climb the ladder of success is the answer.

We must resist the temptation to give a handout when a hand up is what is needed. For example, we think that if we transfer money as generously as we can to the mothers of illegitimate children, we can soften the pain of youngsters without fathers and mothers without husbands. We forget that people respond to incentives. By making illegitimate children a prerequisite for increased financial support, we make certain more illegitimate children will be born. We also add to the immorality involved, as women cannot marry without losing benefits. Tragically, the more illegitimate children a woman has, the more deeply she becomes mired in poverty, and the less likely it is that she can ever stop her dependence on the government. Sweden, which subsidizes unwed mothers even more than we do, has the highest rate of illegitimacy in the world. What is needed is not increased payments for additional children, but a subsidy for mothers who get married and create a stable household.

By giving money to the poor, we think we are aiding and comforting the unfortunate in their time of difficulty. Is this true charity? If poverty (the lack of money) were really what ails the poor, giving away vast amounts of money should help, right? But after thirty years of the "war on poverty," during which more than 3.6 trillion dollars have been given to the poor, poverty is still winning. Poverty is not merely the lack of money; it is the lack of something else. It is the lack of incentive to make the most of the opportunities available to you. We fail to convince the poor that in order to get ahead they need to get a good education, work hard, save money and invest. People who incorporate these values into their lives rarely remain poor. We need to distinguish between the deserving poor and the undeserving poor, thus implementing Paul's principle in 2 Thess. 3:10: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." As long as we fail to exhort the able poor to work we are doing them a great disservice by teaching them that poverty is an entitlement.

When we think about helping the poor, what direction should we take, given the failure of the current welfare system? First we must define poor as it should be defined to aid those truly in need. Nearly 40 percent of those the U.S. government defines as "poor" own their own homes. "Poor" ought to retain its earlier definition: the lack of food, shelter, or clothing. Second, we must remind politicians that promoting the general welfare is not the same as promoting welfare generally. They ought to think in terms of morality and responsibility and always keep in mind that welfare payments can be addictive. As for the poor, we must remind them that it is not a shame to be poor; it is a shame to be lazy and unproductive if you can work. Generations of Americans knew how to be something many of today's poor do not: how to be both poor and proud of their earnings and of the natural human dignity that does not depend on a bank account. Too many of today's poor are not proud, but arrogant; not too proud to take welfare, but too proud to flip hamburgers. The key to welfare reform is not more money, but a greater emphasis on personal responsibility.

Rocky Mountain Family Council

8704 Yates Drive, Suite 205

Westminster, CO 80031

(303) 292-1800

This resource may be reprinted without change and in its entirely for non-commercial purposes

without prior permission from the Rocky Mountain Family Council.