Very interesting suggestion. I&#x27;m also not too familiar with the field, but it seems that most benefits are non-cash (e.g. health and housing), and cash grants tend to be &lt;$1k&#x2F;year [1]. I would guess there are many other reasons for the issues they face, particularly lack of integration into the broader economy.<p>As a counterexample, the Alaska Permanent Fund [2] is very popular, and economists have found it keeps thousands out of poverty.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slate.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;news_and_politics&#x2F;explainer&#x2F;2007&#x2F;03&#x2F;cherokee_perks.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slate.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;news_and_politics&#x2F;explainer&#x2F;20...</a>
[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Alaska_Permanent_Fund" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Alaska_Permanent_Fund</a>