Pauperism was avoided by demanding that anyone able-bodied and mentally competent would be engaged in work, and if there was truly no paying job available for them they would still perform other manual labor for the charity organization in exchange for food and other necessities. No one, then would become a lifelong pauper, but would instead be able to eventually pull themselves out of poverty and again begin contributing fully to the community they were a part of. "Welfare" in the modern conception of the term would have been considered absolutely immoral, not to mention ill advised for purely practical and pragmatic. Not only was it not government's job to provide assistance for the needy, as the government was generally expected to refrain from engaging in moral and spiritual issues, but the providing of un-refereed cash assistance to individuals regardless of their ability to...

This might seem impossible, as theology -- specifically certain Christian beliefs -- was central to the way poverty was tackled before industrialization, but if the concept of God could be replaced by a general philosophy of social responsibility the same effect could be acheived. Proper categorization and discernment of those truly needing assistance, and the type of assistance they need, would still be hugely beneficial in the fight against poverty. Just so, the bonding of charity workers to those they were helping and the freedom of all to work are necessary elements of successful charity.