> "However, giving money to people on the street is not helping." Recall, my goal isn't to solve their problems by giving them small amounts of money. I think

> "However, giving money to people on the street is not helping." Recall, my goal isn't to solve their problems by giving them small amounts of money. I think to solve their problems we need to make society-wide changes. Under our current form of society, there will __always__ be people on the bottom. My hope is that they can use my donation to temporarily boost their happiness. Similar to how when I spend $2 on a cupcake it temporarily boosts my happiness. > "It's enabling." My thesis is that I am not enabling their poverty. If we stopped giving them money, they (in aggregate) could not work themselves out of poverty --- because there isn't room for everyone to make money in our society. Recall, unemployment is non-zero. > "Basically every city has some sort of program to help the homeless work themselves back into society in general." I think these programs are important. But I don't think they should be the only mechanisms by which we contribute charity to impoverished people. > "However, they do require the people participating in them to be fully "bought in". When you give a dollar to someone "down on their luck", you are really giving them just enough of a life-rope to keep from entering these programs (which require sobriety as a matter of course)." It sounds like you are essentially saying that the homeless should be helped __exclusively__ through these programs. I disagree. Not everyone will benefit from those programs; not everyone is even elligile for admission. For instance, you point out non-sober people won't benefit. I don't think people are universally capable of curing themselves of addiction. Some people are unlucky and do not have the "will power" to overcome addiction. This comes back to my point about the possibility that free will might be an illusion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will > "You're not helping them." I am helping them. They smile when I give them money, and then they use it in whatever way they think will improve their life. > "They need to bottom out and seek help of their own free will. That's how the road to ending their homelessness truly begins." I am glad you made that point because I think it illustrates the core of our disagreement. It seems you strongly believe in the existence of free will. You believe that people have a "choice." Whereas I am skeptical that free will exists. I think it is plausible that impoverished people could literally have zero ability to "make choices" that could bring them out of poverty. I am lucky; they are not. I get to eat complimentary delicious food at work, whenever I want. I want to share my wealth directly with the unlucky.