If everyone had the opportunity to work if they were willing, I'd be entirely happy with "Ya don't work, ya don't eat".
Such is unequivocally not the case. Although there are, among the homeless, many people who have the ability to work but no inclination, there are others who might have the inclination but don't have the ability (lacking useful skills and/or experience), and there are others who have both inclination and ability but don't have the opportunity, and when I was homeless myself I was primarily in the lattermost category.
You could claim with logical consistency that people have a right to the money that belongs to them, and that that right supercedes any obligation to help others. In doing so, you choose not to help the homeless, and to allow it, as a phenomenon, to continue unsolved.
The homeless folks could claim with logical consistency that people have a need to eat, and that addressing that need supercedes any obligation to obey the law. So they mug you and take your money, which addresses their immediate need.
You might find their position immoral. They might find yours immoral.
Original SDMB thread - How to Solve Homelessness
See my previous post on this same thread