Quote Originally Posted by dankrutka View Post
This is very different than the other post where a poster claimed cities "ship" homeless to other cities to rid themselves of the population. Helping someone without finances reach a destination -- whether it's a good policy or not -- is not what was discussed. So, do cities actually have this policy?

Now, there's plenty of argument as to whether such a policy of helping those in need reach a destination is a worthy expenditure, but why would it be seen as "nefarious"? I'm unsure what that means. Thanks in advance.
This became a hot topic in politics some time back based on San Francisco's program to assist those without means to get to other places where they might have family or friends they could stay with. But, as happens, hard liner's tried to make this out to be the city just shipping people out to save money. No good deed goes unpunished in this country these days. Of course, I am sure there were some that used the money deceptively to get to places like San Diego in the winter because the weather was better, or somewhere else where they might get some other advantage. But, if you investigate, there are no cities out there bussing homeless out just to make them someone else's burden. You will find some claims of this on some right wing extreme sights with claims about deceptive liberal strategies etc. ... that is why I said "nefarious", as in evil, or with bad motives.