The article ignores that the recipients of Chen's charity are not comparable to those of the handout studies. The latter are a general population in a developin

The article ignores that the recipients of Chen's charity are not comparable to those of the handout studies. The latter are a general population in a developing country - in other words most have a family, many have some work, most have a modest home. The "NYC homeless" on the other hand often are mentally ill, have no ties in the community, no home (duh...) and are usually unemployed, quite a few are or have been addicts. The idea that these people could use the money for drugs and alcohol is actually a lot more warranted than in the general case. Homelessness in developed countries is a completely different problem from poverty in developing countries. Still, it's hard to imagine that this charity is doing a better job with the money than they could do for themselves.