[amha]

That blog post is really, really worth reading.

"The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more. Even if you don’t make the problem worse, even if you make it slightly better, the ethical burden of the problem falls on you as soon as you observe it. ... I don’t subscribe to this school of thought, but it seems pretty popular."

[tomtimtall]

Interestingly there is part of this principle intergrained in the tupilak culture surrounding homeless in the city of Copenhagen. most people do not donate money to homeless beggars because they would like these people to have a better life. But shouldn’t they be giving them some money then you ask? Nope, because giving them money just makes it possible for them to stay homeless, if they run out of money and run out of food, they are forced to seek out the shelters which have social workers that can get hem into the system and help them get back on their feet. Most people on Tage street today fall into two categories: Drug users who avoid the system because they find it easier to keep using drugs outside of the support system, and (I kid you not) homeless people transported to Copenhagen from Eastern European countries by gangs who skim their beggings.

Neither of those groups are helped by you taking on only an infiticimal part of he problem and giving the poor person a dollar. So if you want to actually help them you either give money to shelters, help support initiatives like the homeless paper, or volounteer.