Originally Posted by Jebby
Of course, it is the moral responsibility of all to care for their fellow man. The things is, should that be imposed or voluntary? Is charity better than government imposition?
I think this boils down to a matter of opinion. I think governments role is to be an agency of buying collective stuff society needs, and I think taking care of the poor is both a moral good and something we all end up paying for regardless (crime, medical, etc). I also think it's maybe too important to trust to like, the altruistic whim of individuals. (And I also have some reservations about the alternate politics of charity orgs whether it be the radical politics of PIVOT or the Christian mission of like, The Salvation Army.)
But I mean, ideally this should be something handled at the provincial instead of municipal level and given the amount of drug addiction and poverty in our homeless population it would ideally involve treatment as much as housing. But the Liberals are pretty clear that their priorities aren't social spending, so y'know, is what it is.