Intended consequences are the worst

I saw this news story by Jesse Drucker and Eric Lipton, headlined, “Meant to Lift Poor Areas, Tax Break is Boon to Rich.”

The news article is informative, and the story it tells is horrifying. Beyond all that, I’m bothered by the headline, as it seems that the scamtastic aspect of this tax benefit was intended all along. Maybe instead of “Meant to Lift Poor Areas, Tax Break is Boon to Rich,” the headline should’ve been, “Meant to Help Rich, Well-Connected People, Tax Break Succeeds.”

My larger concern is with the narrative of unintended consequences. Here’s the story: What a paradox! Law intended to help poor, actually helps rich. But it seems like the real story is much simpler. This is an example of something I like to say, that unintended consequences often were actually intended.

P.S. The online headline is, “How a Trump Tax Break to Help Poor Communities Became a Windfall for the Rich.” Better would be, “How a Tax Break to Help Rich People Succeeded in its Purpose.”