By Nathan Barton

Every once in a while, some startling revelation shows up on the television or computer screen.

It happened again.  A major understanding of the laws of the universe has been revealed – and get this: by a British think tank.  Full of (be warned, it is staggering) economists.

This revelation:  Work REDUCES Poverty.  In other words, the more you work, the less likely you (and your children and the rest of your family) are to be living in poverty!

As reported in the Acton Institute’s newletter, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has issued a report with the dry, boring title “Living standards, poverty and inequality: 2017 – summary” (which you can find here).

It states, in part, “…, according to the IFS report the most effective way to reduce that number [of people, especially children, in poverty] is through work. The UK government defines “poverty” as earning 60 percent less than the national median income, and “persistent poverty” as being in “poverty” this year and two of the previous three years. With that said, the IFS reports that persistent poverty is virtually unknown for children in households with at least one working parent. … The rate of persistent poverty for children in households that have had someone in work in each of the last four years is just 5%. On the other hand, children in households that have had no one in work for at least three of the last four years account for slightly over 40%.”

Amazing.  Astonishing.  Incredible.

Now, I can hear you saying, “But that is in Britain.  Things are different on this side of the Atlantic.  Doesn’t mean that will be the case here in the land of the fee and home of the bomb.”

Absolutely.  We know that gravity (to name just one natural phenomenon) is less there than it is here.  Here it is 9.8 m/sec2, but it is barely 9.7 there.  (Is this because they are a monarchy?  But what about Canada or Australia?)  We know that 2+2=4 there, but 2+2=5 (for large values of 2) here in the Fifty States.  (Just like we know that Australian laws trump laws of mathematics Down Under.)

No, seriously: history and looking about at daily life tells us that what is true in the UK is true here in the Fifty States – if people work, they (and the people who are dependent on them) are less likely to live in poverty.  Even if we let governments define what “poverty” means. (And like in the Fifty States, your “typical” living in poverty person in the UK enjoys electricity, running water and flush toilets, cell phones, television (well, telly), and enough food to get fat on.)

Now, if we could just teach the politicians (and the welfare parasites – both “poverty” and “corporate”) some basic laws of economics, mathematics, and physics.  And just maybe a bit of moral teaching with that?

Mama’s Note: Indeed, work cures poverty, but that’s not nearly as effective when the non-voluntary governments at every level steal 70% or more of what is earned by that work. So, now that we know that “work” is the cure for poverty, what is the cure for government theft? We have more work to do…