Again, from the article: "I believe we have this duty even to those who can care for themselves but don’t." As a conservative, I do not agree. If you are capable of working, and able to do so, then you get nothing but disdain from me, if you do not work, and if you live with the expectation that others should provide for you.
I used to feel exactly as you do, but I no longer do, for two reasons. The first is that - to me - the desire to be self-supporting is one of the criteria of mental health. I would now classify anyone who simply refuses to be self-supporting as mentally ill. As such, I would provide minimal support for such a person, but bar them from voting on grounds of mental deficiency.
In the alternative, there are those who pursue work which does not allow them to support themselves, mostly in research or the arts, but other areas as well. These people are obviously not mentally deficient, and in fact provide what makes a culture rich and full and who are often extremely talented. As for their voting rights, I would leave them intact.
Also, the cost of the homeless population is so ridiculously higher than what a minimum subsistence support would cost it's not even remotely funny, nor even remotely financially defendable.
Finally, I believe one of the definitions of a genuine civilization is that every singe person has a place to live. Human beings do not live in the wild, they need a place, no matter how humble, of their own to call home. That one single thing would slash mental illness behaviors and crimes and all sorts of problems, as well as establish a bottom line beyond which we, as human beings answerable to God, should refuse to go.
All that being said, if anyone wants more fantasies from my magic wand, just let me know.
Bravo. Those couple of sentences bothered me too. I agree 100%.
as scripture says....he who does not work, does not eat...