I think so too. I just felt like ranting. I'm not sure I agree. Hypothetically, what if it were possible to statistically end 99% of homelessness, by passing laws forbidding individual help (presumably along with laws for institutional help)? Of course, it's the classic question of Deontology vs Teleology, and people have been arguing about it for hundreds of years.I think the author of this piece agrees with you.
Homelessness is a problem, but my interaction with a homeless person must transcend statistics because I am human and so are they.
IMO the easy answer is that we don't need to worry too much about such scenarios because they don't exist, and in those cases where efficiency of mass behavior is determined to be good, the cost of enforcement needs to be weighed against it. Enforcing teeth brushing might have measurable benefit, but enforcing teeth brushing will also have measurable downsides, if only the re-conceptualization of the purpose of government.Hypothetically, what if it were possible to statistically end 99% of homelessness, by passing laws forbidding individual help (presumably along with laws for institutional help)?