Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

NYTimes: Giving cash to poor families for child development may not work

To be precise, it may not work if the goal is to promote child development.

“But now a rigorous experiment, in a more direct test, found that years of monthly payments did nothing to boost children’s well-being, a result that defied researchers’ predictions and could weaken the case for income guarantees.

After four years of payments, children whose parents received $333 a month from the experiment fared no better than similar children without that help, the study found. They were no more likely to develop language skills, avoid behavioral problems or developmental delays, demonstrate executive function or exhibit brain activity associated with cognitive development.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5July 29, 2025 10:40 AM

Did they really think giving financially needy families $4K a year was somehow going to turn the children into middle class suburbanites?

Talk to the families. Find out what they spent it on. Preventing their own homelessness, reducing food scarcity and reducing household debt have got to rank a lot higher than buying their kids educational toys and books.

by Anonymousreply 1July 29, 2025 10:31 AM

$333 a month isn't much

by Anonymousreply 2July 29, 2025 10:34 AM

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day.

Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

by Anonymousreply 3July 29, 2025 10:38 AM

How did they think this would help child development? Did they think the parents would have unlimited time to sit around and read to their children? When you have a full time job, you have to work full time. You can't just take off time from work because someone is paying you a paltry $333 per month. So they aren't going to have lots of time to read to their children or spend time helping their kids

What would actually help is allowing people with office jobs, the ability to work from home. That would save the parent probably 5 to 10 hours a week (or more) in commute time each week

by Anonymousreply 4July 29, 2025 10:40 AM

I agree with R2 that the amount is shit in today's America. There are families that get twice the amount in food stamps. You can't expect them to make a dollar out of 15 cents as grocery prices continue to rise daily. Financial literacy classes for the parents would also be lovely. I think this study is bullshit. The government needs a better plan to tackle this problem.

by Anonymousreply 5July 29, 2025 10:40 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!