There is a lot of discussion of assisting and or supplementing the under privileged coupled with the Rich paying their fair share. These discussions generally are focused on funding and the transfer of monetary funds from self sufficient individuals to those who are unable or unwilling to self fund their own needs. As $ is work storage and stored work is wealth this essentially translates into the self sufficient working harder to then donate their excess work or have their work taken so that the recipient can take anothers work without compensation. In the simplest form it is either charity if the transfer is voluntary by the giver or socialized theft / slavery if the transfer is involuntary. This system only works when both the transfer is a small percentage of the self sufficients excess and the number of those in need of assistance is a small percentage of the population.
The assistance system, while seemingly compassionate, has a mechanical unintended consequence of compounding the problem by both widening the gap of wealth inequality and increasing the number of people in need of assistance. The unintended consequence is that the self sufficient at the upper edge of the gap want to maintain their level of wealth and often work harder or longer to do so. Those at the bottom of the gap receiving assistance will be tempted to work less as they are receiving the benefit of work without doing the work. Those in the middle of the gap faced with working more for minimal gain or working less and receiving gain are likely to choose the latter.
The absurdity of this system can be demonstrated effectively in athletic sports competition. Let's take running for example. If you were to strive for all runners to reach the finish line at roughly the same time. Suppose you assisted the slower or participants with proportedly less ablility to start line be placed forward of the standard begin race point based on their current finish distance behind the winner.
The fastest would likely train harder and longer as needed to run faster over the standard distance. The assisted would likely see less need to train harder as they were now running a shorter race. This approach widens the gap between actual abilities as the assisted individuals muscles are trained for lesser required levels of effort. As subsequent races are run and higher levels of assistance are given the start points are progressively moved forward and the gap widens.

This in my mind demonstrates the danger of the public assistance of giving out fishes. While it makes the provider feel compassionate and feeds the recipient for a day, the recipient eventually loses their fishing skills. This system is not sustainable and is doomed to fail.

The sustainable path is for those on assistance to receive not fishes but fishing lessons. This process is favored as it provides the reward only as a function of the less abled developing the legitimate skills needed to earn the reward. In this process the ability of the disadvantaged cannot be faked or assigned as inauthenticity does not produce the reward. In this process only the earning of and demonstration of legitimate skills will produce reward.

Both the give a nan a fish and teach a man to fish process will initially provide all a fish. Over time the fish givers will reach a limit of fish catching that is outstripped by the need for fish. The fish giving system will eventuall fail to the detriment of all. When all men are skilled fishers the fish catching ability of each is required to be lower on average as it only need to satisfy the needs of a single individuals need. This system is sustainable over time.

Stop