> gMoney wrote: > So lets focus our discussion to this point. Is there an obligation on our > part to provide monetary assistance (in the form of education, drug > programs, etc) for people who have impoverished themselves by their on > choices? And if so, are there reasonable benchmarks that society can set > that the person is required to meet in order to receive said assistance? And > if so, is there a point where society can, for all intents and purposes, > give up on someone and leave them to their chosen fate? >
:: tears up :: Dang, g, you've done such a good job at synthesizing this data you're almost ... well ... you sound like a management consultant. There. I've said it. I'm so proud! (really - good job) So. On to your points: (1.) Is there an obligation to fund: Absolutely yes. I would say not just an obligation but a legitimate ROI case can easily be made. (2.) Should we require measurable improvement based on our funding? Absolutely yes. If you can't measure it you can't accomplish it (which is when things get complicated). (3.) Should we give up on someone who isn't making progress? Yes, however what that means is open to debate. For example, France considers beggars to have a legitimate occupation. Maybe that's ok if can take care of 80% of the problem. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Deploy Web Applications Quickly across the enterprise with ColdFusion MX7 & Flex 2 Free Trial http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:237298 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
