> It's not illogical to prefer giving food and housing to cash. It's not inherently logical either. Your assertion that indirect funding is somehow more effec

> It's not illogical to prefer giving food and housing to cash. It's not inherently logical either. Your assertion that indirect funding is somehow more effective is unproven. If you want to be strictly logical about it, you decide up front what the actual goals are, and you try and find the most cost effective way to reach them. It may be counterintuitive, but it's entirely plausible that on the whole direct funding is more effective. There is at least some good evidence pointing this way in some areas. If you dig into any of this stuff in any real depth, you'll find that the "common sense" solutions are often wrongheaded for non obvious ways. Further: breaking the world into "normal folks" and "homeless people incapable of managing their finances" is far too reductive. There certainly are people whose addictions or mental health issues or whatever make it difficult for them to manage their own finances, but that is a small fraction of the people who rely on some sort of public assistance.