Aid repeated soon becomes a perceived right and duty for both giver and receiver.

Evidence

It is only for this circle, which, being the largest, has no other outside it to which to transfer an obligation, that a problem pointed out by the practitioners of welfare in the small corporative entities ceases to exist: the fact that they frequently avoid giving assistance to the poor, for fear that once they have taken care of them they will always have them on their hands. We see manifested here a very important characteristic for human sociation, a trait which might be called moral induction: when an act of assistance has been performed, of whatever type, although it be spontaneous and individual and not demanded by any obligation, there is a duty to continue it, a duty which is not only a claim on the part of the one who receives the assistance but also a sentiment on the part of the one who gives. It is a very common experience that the beggars to whom alms are given with regularity consider these very rapidly as their right and as the duty of the giver, and if the latter fails in this supposed obligation they interpret it as a denial of their due contribution and feel a bitterness which they would not feel against someone who always denied them alms. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 426

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s essay apparatus: moral induction is a mechanism parallel to how repeated acts of attention become expected in urban social contracts.
• DEFINE: Defines Simmel’s concept of ‘moral induction’—that a first charitable act generates a felt obligation to continue.