edit: I would advocate for a sensible area somewhere between the two ludicrous extremes of 'everyone just look out for themselves' and 'collars that monitor every moment of their lives' based on general consensus arrived at via public discussion and democracy.
Not yet.
> edit: I would advocate for a sensible area somewhere between the two ludicrous extremes
That sensible conclusion is "you can't save everyone". If you try, you inevitably become the tyrant we must be saved from.
To save everyone, you require omniscience and omnipotence. You must know everything about your subjects and have the power to act on that knowledge. There's not a single human on this Earth I would trust with that power.
I never said you could.
It must be hard for you to get around with all these slippery slopes you keep seeing everywhere
> in the UK the status quo is that it is the job of the state to look after vulnerable children/people
You literally said it's the state's job to "look after" all those people.
So how far are you willing to go to save them? How much are you willing to sacrifice? Once you inevitably fail because of the limits of the system, will you respect those limits? Or will you sacrifice everyone's freedom and humanity to lift them?