I find the concept of "moral hazard" foul when applied to things like retirement provision, social healthcare and social security. It is used a justification to let others rot and starve.
I know that's a common feeling, but I tend to view it as an acknowledgement that we need to understand the behavior being incentivized rather than an actual statement about morals which can be endlessly debated.
There's some irony in the phrasing used to decry the term "moral hazard" though in that it seems to hint of morals itself.
In the U.S. this is often referred to as the "moral hazard". True they may be the 'smart' ones, but I can't help but think there's got to be a system that prioritizes the area of the Venn diagram where "smart" and "moral" overlap.