Do we have evidence of this? I'd like to believe it's true, but there's a part of me that thinks giving people food and housing rather than money makes it less likely they'll spend it on drugs.
Which is like arguing that distributing condoms causes teenagers to have sex, or needle exchange causes drug use. You're solving the wrong problem.
We can be sure addicts are going to get their drugs, and they're going to get the drugs whether they have a place to live and food on the table or not. The question is whether they're going to be committing other crimes that put society at risk in order to do so. I'd rather they spend my tax money than break into my house.
My problem isn't that they're using drugs, at least in the immediate; my problem is that if we give them money and they spend it on drugs then we haven't done anything about the fact that they're still hungry and homeless.
The problem we want to solve is that these people don't have food and shelter - or from a more selfish perspective, that these people are costing us money on prisons and emergency services. Now, would giving these people money solving these problems? Would giving them money be more effective at solving these problems than housing projects and food programs? Like I say, I'd like to believe giving them money works, but I want to see the evidence.
