The trouble is rules based safety nets often end up subsidising what they are supposed to be alleviating.
The big advantage a charity has is that they do not have to give you anything if they do not think you actually deserve it… the state on the other hand operates (quite rightly) not by using discretion but by following politically derived formulae. To get things from the state all you have to do is understand the system. This has all manner of unintended consequences when you (in effect) nationalise charity and replace private institutions with public ones… in short, when you replace charity with an entitlement, you completely change the rules of the game.
I suppose no-one has commented simply because there’s nothing to disagree with. sometimes simple truths do need to be stated, but there isn’t anything to add.