This is a poem from 1949 printed in a newspaper (bias is not new, they just used to be more up front and honest about it). And it rings true today even more than back then.
It seems so compassionate and caring to just give more to people you define as "in need," but that definition keeps getting broader and eventually that money will run out. And then the people "in need" are not only lacking, but the entire society collapses so nobody has any means to help them out, and they are utterly without the skills or worldview to help themselves.
So which is more compassionate? To give people room and opportunity to get on their own feet when they fall... or keep them down until there's nothing left to help them with?
I know. I'm doing too damn much thinking.
This post courtesy American Digest.