I guess the real question is this: At what point do we stop becoming a solution to the problem of the homeless and become a facilitator of the problem?
I don't think anyone yet on this forum has said they mind giving someone a hand when they have fallen. It appears that the issue is whether we must as a government-funded (meaning you and me) mandate, after giving a hand for them to stand on their own, then become a pair of crutches for the rest of their lives - or worse yet must carry them on our backs.
I participated in two "charity" events post-Katrina, both on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. On immediately after involved being part of a church group that carried three open trailer loads of essential supplies to Waveland, the other about a year later to help rebuild a room that had been irreparably damaged by flood waters in the Long Beach (maybe it was Pass Christian, don't remember for sure). Those folks were danmed ecstatic to get the supplies the first time (some never got unloaded to the holding area because they were taken straight from the trailer to the needy), but when we went back we found that life was returning to normal - wasn't normal but well on the way.
So what is the difference between the "rednecks" and self-described "river rats" in Mississippi and the folks in New Orleans? Seems that the ones in Mississippi were used to being self sufficient, and given the hand picked themselves up, shook the hand that assisted them, and carried on with life. There should be a lesson learned there.
So Hound, I would answer itt this way: They should be given a chance to make it on their own. If they don't, so be it. We just can't continue to be a part of the entitlement mentality problem. We as a country cannot afford to do otherwise.