In theory, I'm for a well executed state run welfare system, as a German we have one if the best in the world(as far as I know). <br>The problem is always that anything the state does is not very efficient. <br>It's almost like the example when you donate for a 3rd world country only 20% arrives where intended and 80% is for the salaries+expenses of the NGO. <br>Though i don't know the exact numbers of our government welfare system (maybe i should) i know it should be below 3% of annual government spending, which isn't too bad.<br>We should also keep in mind that the USA calculates cost of 30-80.000$ for one homeless person per year. Those costs include social workers, police&amp;jail, homeless shelters, drug treatment, crime and so on. <br>So you're going to have costs either way but with one approach you can minimize suffering.<br>The main argument remaining that speaks against a welfare state would be that it's better for the economy (since people "try harder" not to hit rock bottom.<br>I'm sceptical of this. I think no one (other than maybe a few exceptions) actually prefers to be on welfare if you could actually have a better alternative with a positive outlook and a brighter future. Now of course, if you end up in expoitative labor that treats you like human garbage without any chance to progress over time and that pays the same as welfare that's a difficult problem.<br>But no matter how hard people try, some will inevitably reach their limits, break down and fall through the cracks.<br>That is inevitable in today's time and age.<br>Do they land in a net, or on concrete?