True, but many are homeless by choice, choosing to spend any money they get on cigs, booze, drugs etc while we pay for necessaries. Both in tax dollars and philanthropic giving. Are we really just enabling them?
Having been a step away from homelessness in years past I can tell you it is not all black and white as each person is an individual. As an employer when I made it to that point in life I came across many people who were homeless. Some just needed a lil' help to get them onto there next step in life, a car, a safe place to stay and wash, a job, a lil' cash, or maybe even some food and others were totally mental and beyond anything I could do to help. A few I helped get into jobs, cars, and homes were convinced to cause me excessive problems by a few state employees that couldn't stand me for one reason or another (those state employees were resentful and generally had been caught in unethical behavior of some kind or another. One state employee was even taking sexual favors from one of my employees. She evidently thought it was more convenient for her to give bj's in the backroom to the state supervisor verses do her job). The thing is you can just put one big label on the problem and think it will all go away.
Why do you think it's important to provide shelter, clothing etc to the homeless?
What else would you do with people who are incapable of taking care of themselves? Euthanasia isn't a viable option.
How many can't, and how many just won't?
If estimating I would say most likely that there are more that can be helped under the right conditions than those who cannot be helped. If we as a society though do nothing to start treating the symptoms that are creating the problems in the first place the problems will continue to grow.