I agree on the problems it can cause a society. A society cannot progress without action.
I'll be trying to remove the euphemisms and state it for exactly what it is in the following statements.
It seems, that essentially, society cannot move forward without an application of survival of the fittest (and this is what it is, just applied differently). If you're weak (not willing to do or not putting in effort, enough effort, or lack skills) then you can either die on the street or "live poorly". The majority of society seems to already support this ideology. Much to my chagrin, I can't deny that I do as well (or rather, that I acknowledge it as the only solution to progressing society). I can't fathom any alternative to progressing as a society without an "the weak can die, survival is for the strong" ideology. They're intertwined. No matter how much I ponder a solution, I arrive to the same conclusion (doesn't mean I've stopped pondering it of course)
Disagreement among the population comes in when this ideal is applied on higher levels, but we all (or most of us) agree when it's applied on a much less conspicuous plane.
But what can we do. Another one of humanity's conundrums.
Also, so it doesn't get twisted. I don't mind giving food and money to the homeless, and I couldn't care less their reason for choosing to live that way. I simply recognize the problem it presents for society if everyone got the idea to live this way. Though, to me, that's as about as possible as the entire population acquiring the propensity for smoking.
