I think it depends on what you mean by ‘nefarious’. If someone’s paycheck depends on them not noticing a particular problem (like things not working, or a poss

I think it depends on what you mean by ‘nefarious’. If someone’s paycheck depends on them not noticing a particular problem (like things not working, or a possible metric that could be used but that would result in funding problems), then the people that still notice that problem will tend to no longer have paycheck eh? Self correcting problem. That the non profits are doing PR/publicity to guilt trip the public into giving out money is just good business/survival. As long as they aren’t getting too aggressive anyway. Nefarious, in my mind, would be something like someone going out and setting peoples houses on fire (or starting riots) to make more ‘customers’, or sabotaging their job interviews to keep them locked in the system. Ultimately, the voters are the ones who have to decide what they want. Are they okay continuing to give money to the same ‘beggar’ who has been camped on the side of that off-ramp for 20 years now, or do something different? Don’t expect the beggar to like them stopping though.