I don't know if you did this intentionally, but what you just wrote is a great example of what the quote is referring to. You've decided that since they're not

I don't know if you did this intentionally, but what you just wrote is a great example of what the quote is referring to. You've decided that since they're not literally dying from starvation then they deserve no sympathy and no help. I for one would prefer to live in a world where poverty of the sort seen in your picture doesn't exist. Part of achieving that is being willing to help out others when they hit hard times but aren't necessarily on the verge of death. Raising the standard of living means just that: it means raising the base expectation of what life as a human being entails. When someone faces trouble and falls below that base expectation, others jump in to help. The worst sin this couple did, as far as I can tell, is they bought some root beer with food stamps and didn't sell a car which they very much needed for reliable transportation. They used the government help when they needed it, then regained employment and are once again self-sufficient. This is exactly what these social services are for. Let's suppose they got no help at all, like you seem to think would have been fair. They probably would have had to sell the car in order to feed their children (and themselves). They would have soon lost all modes of personal transportation, in fact, because their Honda broke down (and are you going to spend cash to repair it when you need every dime you have for food?). Therefore, they would have relied almost entirely on public transportation. The difficulty of finding new employment just doubled, meaning that the length of time they face poverty probably also just doubled. But selling that car didn't fix the fundamental mathematical problem of "income < expenses." It only provided temporary capital at the expense of personal transportation and probably employment, meaning it actually exacerbated the real problem, which is increasing income rather than immediate cash reserves. Oh, and by the way, back when they were making $120k, and now again that they have decent income again, they were (and now are again) paying so that others can receive the same help in similar situations.