[Taek]

I have close acquaintances who will take that $50, spend it on drugs, and then starve to death. If you want them to stay alive, you have to give them non-money.

If everyone spent money like a rational, 100 IQ individual with a moderate amount of schooling on basic financial strategies, it'd be a lot easier to manage a population. Unfortunately, less than half of the population is 100 IQ, and in some areas less than 5% of the population understands a single high school course worth of financial management.

And then of course you have fundamentally irrational actors as well, like drug addicts. IQ and education don't help there, addictions are monsters that swallow people of all socio-economic varieties.

So you have to either let those people squalor, or find another solution.

[MisterTea]

> If you want them to stay alive, you have to give them non-money.

Which can be traded for money.

Believe me, I understand first hand how difficult a heavily addicted person can be. Recovery is a huge process that takes more than just giving someone a safe place to live and food.

[kiba]

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. It doesn't need to be 100% effective, just need to be effective enough that it reduces the size of the problem to a manageable size.

Then you can manage the special cases with specialists.

[rolandog]

Exactly. Continuous improvement where all relevantly stakeholders are taken into account should be the norm.

[jimnotgym]

> I have close acquaintances who will take that $50, spend it on drugs, and then starve to death.

I'm sure we can all think of edge cases. I'm sure there are people who will trade the food for drugs some how. They probably need addiction and mental health help, rather than someone who 'knows what is good for them'