Why is it so hard to escape poverty??

為什么擺脫貧困如此之難?

作者： Ann-Helén Bay

Imagine that you’ve been unemployed and seeking work for months.Government benefit programs?have helped you cover rent, utilities, and food,but you're barely getting by. Finally, you hear back about?a job application.You receive your first paycheck?in months, and things seem to be turning around. But there’s a catch.Your new job pays just enough to disqualify you from the benefit programs, and not enough to cover the same costs. To make things worse, you have to pay for transportation to work,and childcare while you’re at the office. Somehow, you have less money now than when you were unemployed.

想象一下，你失業(yè)找工作已經(jīng)好幾個月了。政府福利項目幫你支付房租、水電費和食物費，但這只夠你勉強糊口。終于，你收到了一個申請工作的回復。你收到了幾個月來的第一份薪水，事情似乎正在好轉(zhuǎn)。但有一個問題。你新工作的薪水恰恰讓你不符合領取福利津貼的資格，而不足以支付你的正常生活開銷。更糟糕的是，你必須支付上班的交通費，在辦公室期間的托兒費。不知怎的，你現(xiàn)在的錢比你失業(yè)時還要少。

?

Economists call this demoralizing?situation the welfare trap—one of the many different poverty traps affecting millions of people around the world. Poverty traps are economic and environmental circumstances that reinforce?themselves, perpetuating?poverty for generations. Some poverty traps are?tied to?an individual’s circumstances, like a lack of access to healthy food or education. Others can affect entire nations, such as cycles of corrupt?government or climate change. But the cruel irony of welfare traps in particular is that they stem from?the very policies designed to battle poverty.

經(jīng)濟學家稱這種令人沮喪的情況為福利陷阱——影響世界各地數(shù)百萬人的眾多不同的貧困陷阱之一。貧困陷阱是自我強化的一種經(jīng)濟和環(huán)境狀況，它使貧困世代延續(xù)。一些貧困陷阱與個人的情況有關，比如缺乏健康食品或教育。其他因素甚至可能影響整個國家，比如周而復始的腐敗政府或氣候變化。但福利陷阱的殘酷諷刺之處在于，它們源于與貧困作斗爭的政策本身。

?

Most societies throughout?history employed some strategies to help people in poverty meet basic needs. Before the 20th century, religious groups and private charities often led such initiatives. Today, these are called welfare programs, and they usually take the form of government-provided subsidies?for housing, food, energy, and healthcare. Typically, these programs are means-tested, meaning that only people who fall below a certain income level are eligible for?benefits. This policy is designed to ensure aid?goes to those who need it most. But it also means people lose access as soon as they earn more than the qualification threshold, regardless of whether or not they're financially stable enough to stay there. This vicious?cycle is harmful to both those in poverty and those outside of it.

歷史上大多數(shù)社會都會采取一些手段來幫助貧困人口滿足基本需求。在20世紀之前，宗教團體和私人慈善機構經(jīng)常領導這類活動。如今，這些被稱為福利項目，通常采用政府提供住房、食品、能源和醫(yī)療補貼的形式。通常，這些計劃是經(jīng)過經(jīng)濟狀況調(diào)查的，這意味著只有低于特定收入水平的人才有資格獲得福利。這項政策旨在確保資源流向最需要的人。但這也意味著，一旦人們的收入超過特定門檻，他們就失去了獲得援助的資格，不管他們的財務狀況是否穩(wěn)定。這種惡性循環(huán)對貧困與不貧困的人都有害。

?

Mainstream economic models assume people are rational?actors who weigh the cost and benefits of their options?and choose the most advantageous path forward. If those in poverty know they'll gain no net benefit from working, they're?incentivized to?remainin government assistance. Of course, people work for many reasons, including societal norms?and personal values. But income is a major incentive?to pursuing employment. And when less people take on new jobs, the economy slows down, keeping people in poverty and potentially pushing people on the cusp of?poverty over the edge.

主流經(jīng)濟模型假設人們是理性的行動者，他們權衡自己選擇的成本和收益，然后選擇最有利的前進道路。如果貧困人口知道他們不會從工作中獲得任何凈收益，他們就會有動力繼續(xù)接受政府援助。當然，人們工作有很多原因，包括社會規(guī)范和個人價值觀。但收入是追求就業(yè)的主要動機。當越來越少的人從事新的工作時，經(jīng)濟就會放緩，使人們陷入貧困，并有可能將人們推到貧困的邊緣。

?

Some have suggested this feedback loop could be removed by eliminating government assistance programs?altogether. But most agree the solution is neither realistic nor humane. So how can we redesign benefits in a way that doesn't penalize?people for working? Many countries have tried different ways to circumvent?this problem.

一些人建議，完全取消政府援助計劃可以消除這種反饋循環(huán)。但大多數(shù)人認為，這種解決方案既不現(xiàn)實也不人道。那么我們?nèi)绾沃匦略O計福利，才能不懲罰工作的人呢？許多國家嘗試了不同的方法來規(guī)避這個問題。

Some allow people to continue receiving benefits for a given period after finding a job, while others phase out?benefits gradually as income increases. These policies still remove some financial incentive to work, but the risk of a welfare trap is lower. Other governments provide benefits like education, childcare, or medical care equally across all their citizens.

有些政府允許人們在找到工作后的一段時間內(nèi)繼續(xù)領取福利，另一些政府則隨著收入的增加而逐漸取消福利。這些政策仍然移除了一些工作的經(jīng)濟鼓勵，但陷入福利陷阱的風險較低。其他政府為所有公民平等提供教育、兒童保育或醫(yī)療等福利。

?

One proposed solution takes this idea of universal benefits even further. A universal basic income would provide a fixed benefit to all members of society, regardless of wealth or employment status. This is the only known policy that could entirely remove welfare traps, since any earned wages would supplement?the benefit rather than replace it. In fact, by creating a stable income floor?below which no one can fall,basic income might prevent people from falling into poverty in the first place.

一個提議將這一福利普及的想法進一步推廣。全民基本收入將為社會所有成員提供固定福利，無論其財富或就業(yè)狀況如何。這是唯一可以完全消除福利陷阱的已知政策，因為任何掙來的工資都會補充福利，而不是取代福利。事實上，通過創(chuàng)造一個穩(wěn)定的收入底線，可能會從一開始就防止人們陷入貧困。

Numerous economists and thinkers have championed?this idea since the 18th century. But for now, universal basic income remains largely hypothetical. Although it's been tried in some places on a limited scale, these local experiments don’t tell us much about how the policy would play out across an entire nation—or a planet. Whatever strategy governments pursue, solving the welfare trap requires respecting people’s agency and autonomy. Only by empowering individuals to create long-term change in their lives and communities can we begin to break the cycle of poverty.

自18世紀以來，無數(shù)經(jīng)濟學家和思想家一直支持這一觀點。就目前而言，普遍基本收入在很大程度上仍然是假設性的。雖然在一些地方進行了有限規(guī)模的試驗，但這些地方的試驗并沒有告訴我們這項政策甚至在整個國家或全球的效果如何。無論政府采取何種戰(zhàn)略，解決福利陷阱都需要尊重人民的代理權和自主權。只有賦予個人權力，使其生活和社區(qū)發(fā)生長期變化，我們才能開始打破貧困的循環(huán)。

點擊查看：音頻、英字+無字幕視頻

文稿的重點詞匯詳解發(fā)布在公眾號【laylanote】中。