The problem with giving cash is that it incentivizes them to continue to panhandle, even if there are other ways they could be spending their time that are more beneficial for them. Maybe they could be waiting in a government office to sort out a benefits issue, or they could be relaxing indoors in a shelter or church, but they feel like they need to sit outside because if they don't they're losing income.
Give to nonprofits that focus on helping the homeless - they will be able to distribute the benefits in a way that is better in the long-term for the homeless themselves.
"The problem with giving cash is that it incentivizes them to continue to panhandle, even if there are other ways they could be spending their time that are more beneficial for them. Maybe they could be waiting in a government office to sort out a benefits issue, or they could be relaxing indoors in a shelter or church, but they feel like they need to sit outside because if they don't they're losing income."
Is this actually true?
1) Why would relaxing indoors be beneficial compared to not earning income? Isn't the whole point in society that lazing around is a bad thing and the poor should work hard to try and get themselves to a better space, which requires money? In the case of the homeless it's public humiliation in exchange for spare change.
2) What if they did, and then they have to wait several months for a response from the gov't (eg. disability)?
Give to nonprofits that focus on helping the homeless - they will be able to distribute the benefits in a way that is better in the long-term for the homeless themselves.