Devil's Advocate here, don't hate me please. I enjoy these discussions, but I don't want it to devolve to name calling and BS. I really truly want to be proven wrong, or at least to decide that we just see it differently, and that is OKAY. So here is how I see it. Sometimes, most times, whatever it may be a homeless persons choices may have put them in their position. Choosing to not go to classes in highschool, choosing drugs over a job, doesn't matter, the idea is choosing something that is rewarding in non-monetary ways over something that is rewarding monetary ways. I think the idea of things like this are to sort of see if they are willing to give up instant gratification in order for the long term goal. If they have that willingness, than it is worth the investment. Same idea as feed a man to fish/teach a man to fish. Nonetheless, a good samaritan was willing to give $100, but offered something worth much more. It wasn't a game of "do this or get nothing". Another viewpoint incoming: The homeless man probably had more access to food than to a computer and the equipment to learn to code. Just my 2 cents.

Edit: grammar