Sounds and Fury

紐約時報專欄作家Nicholas Kristof在紐約書評上評論兩本關於貧窮的書，有些重點很不錯，摘要如下。(對個別論點有興趣者請見原文，連結見上面紐約書評)
（此君專欄大部分焦點都是在第三世界的發展問題上，並是在美國主流媒體上最積極談蘇丹達佛問題的專欄作家）

讓女人管理家庭財務是對抗貧窮的有效方法。（可惜他沒有引用實證資料）

 We should be clear: one smart way to fight poverty is to empower women (by educating girls, by giving daughters legal rights to inheritance, by promoting banking institutions that give women control over the accounts). Once mothers control family spending rather than fathers, family resources are invested more productively, and some families can rise out of poverty very quickly. This makes the fight for gender equality in the developing world not only a moral imperative but also an economic one. Aid groups recognize this and are adjusting their strategies.

窮人暴動的問題不是他們發生暴動，而是他們暴動的不夠----因為窮人一向比較逆來順受。

Even when middle-class or wealthy families were displaced in, say, New Orleans, they mostly figured out how to get what they needed. For a start, they demanded it. Loudly. Insistently. But the people stuck in the shelters, black and white, were typically not only poorer but also less demanding, less assertive, less skilled in negotiating their way through the system. Poor families in the shelters were neglected precisely because they were suffering so patiently. After that experience, I caught myself thinking that the problem is not that the poor riot, but that they don't riot enough.

提供津貼讓兒童接受教育。

之前看了一部關於第三世界童工的紀錄片，我就在思考，我們當然不希望看到童工，但這是因為那些家庭沒辦法吧。所以如果只是讓工廠不雇用童工，而沒有解決每個家庭的貧窮問題，那是沒有用的。應該是要要提供誘因，讓父母願意送小孩上學。包括巴西在內的國家提出比較好的辦法，就是如果父母送小孩去學校（而不是去工廠），就發給津貼---我想理論上這個津貼應該是要和她去工廠得到的工資一樣多才有意義。

Education has also proved an excellent investment, and we now know that the most cost-effective way to keep children in school isn't to ban child labor, to pass laws requiring school attendance, or even to build schools. Rather, it's to bribe parents with cash grants for keeping kids in school. Understanding Poverty cites improvements in school attendance rates of 20 percentage points by such programs.