BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Panhandlers

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
nutella23
16:45 / 17.10.02
How do you feel about panhandling in general? Do you ever give $ to panhandlers? Sometimes? Never? Depends? Do you feel offended/threatened/annoyed by their presence? Do you feel sorry for them?

I'm asking mainly due to the fact that I've noticed a big increase in panhandling in my neck of the woods. I'm guessing its due in part to the crappy economy and the cutting back on aid/services to the poor...and yet, at the same time, I notice that more and more of them seem to be rather youngish, teens and 20's. Many have that neo-hippie look and seem to be just passing through the area.

Sometimes I give if the mood strikes me (and I can spare it). Or if its a particularly miserable-looking person standing out in the rain/cold. Often I just ignore them, since there seem to be a few who are genuinely unpleasant, aggressive, etc. Particularly annoying are the young kids who yell at those who won't give them anything.

Sometimes I feel pity, sometimes I'm thinking "Get off your ass and get a job", and sometimes I just try NOT to think about it.

But it seems to be definitely on the increase.

What's it like in your area and how do you react to their presence?
 
 
w1rebaby
17:40 / 17.10.02
Er, where are you?

Something I've noticed moving from London to Baltimore is the almost complete lack of beggars and visible homeless people in the city centre. It's not like Baltimore's a social paradise where everyone lives in peace and comfort, either. I suppose there are fewer pedestrians than London, but the idea of going to a cashpoint and not finding someone sleeping by it is strange. I don't know. Do the cops move them on in the US? Is the housing situation different? I know housing is significantly cheaper here than in London, so even if poverty is the same or worse, people will still have a roof over their heads.
 
 
nutella23
17:53 / 17.10.02
I'm in Northampton, MA.

I can only speak for the housing situation in MA. at present, its definitely getting more expensive to live out here, ie. gentrification is in full swing. Lots of out-of-town developers buying up cheap properties (row housed and old Victorians) to convert into pricey condos. Lots of yuppie-type boutiques and more restaraunts than you'd believe. (Sometimes we joke that the city's main drag is a food court without a roof.)

Panhandling is legal in MA. (I think it varies from state to state, as do the vagrancy laws). Various judges have upheld panhandling as "freedom of speech", and usually the cops don't give them a hard time around here. I think they can get arrested if they panhandle in front of an ATM or if they block a doorway and refuse to move. But in general things are pretty lenient in this area--which might be why there are so many now.

Local homeless shelters have had their budgets slashed by the state, and some of them are in danger of shutting down or limiting their services. Not good in light of another New England winter around the bend. But again, that only applies to this area. I don't know how things are outside of here.
 
 
w1rebaby
18:42 / 17.10.02
That sounds like the reason, then. My dad told me that when he first came to London, thirty years or so ago, you would hardly ever see people sleeping rough and begging. Now, with property prices at ridiculous levels, the Tories and then New Labour, the socio-economic indicators are right for resulting in a lot of miserable people who can't afford shit.
 
 
gridley
20:40 / 17.10.02
Philly has become lousy with young white suburban panhandlers over the past five years. They're clean, they're dressed ok, but they sit on street corners with "homeless" signs and beg for money (often with dogs). They honestly look like they just hopped the train into the city from their parent's suburban homes and spend the day begging, before heading home for dinner. I used to think that maybe their parents kicked them out for being gay, but most of them seem embarassingly straight. Then I thought it was some kind of drug-selling scheme, but I've found no evidence to back that theory up.

I don't know what Philly did with the rest of our homeless though. It seems like there's fewer and fewer actual homeless, which I suppose is a good thing, right? Except that it seems slightly sinister.
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
20:42 / 17.10.02
I don't give anything to panhandlers anymore. I'm wary of the whole panhandling thing in general, but most of my reason for not giving stems from bad experiences w/panhandlers. I've never been exactly rich, but there have been times when I was probably just a step or two from being that guy sitting on a streetcorner (never mind my brief bout with actual homelessness). Nonetheless, I've always been exceedingly generous w/my stuff. Probably to a fault. When I lived in Pittsburgh and rarely had money even for food, panhandlers would hassle me all the time. Every once in a while, they'd catch me when I was on the way home from my job at a bagel shop, and I'd be lugging a big bag of food that they were going to toss out. Mr. Panhandler would approach, ask for money for food, I would explain that he probably had more money on him than I did but that I would be happy to share some of the food I had w/him, he would refuse, saying that he would rather have money instead, and I would ignore Mr. Panhandler and march on my merry way. This happened too many times and now I'm a bit jaded.

Generally, if someone in need is providing something, such as playing an instrument on a streetcorner, I'll give him or her some money if I have it to give. If they're just sitting there and begging (or actively following you, even into places of business, to solicit change, as some have a tendency to do in this town), I don't.

The best line I ever heard, though, was, "Help, help, help. I ain't got nothin' but the blues...". You better believe I gave that guy some money.
 
 
Murray Hamhandler
20:45 / 17.10.02
Oh, yeah. I also used to know suburbanite punk kids that did that shit. Kids whose parents would drop them off somewhere in their SUV's, who knew that I knew this and would still have the nerve to try to bum change off of me.
 
 
woodswalker
22:23 / 17.10.02
I see panhandling a lot here in Rochester, (NY). I don't give anything usually, except occasionally a cigarrette. I feel like these people are just begging out of habit, like "what the hell, ask everyone and someone will give you something" I do fell a tad guilty at times. I assuage my guilt by doing volunteer stuff at the local hospital and such. How do you judge who truly needs? I can't.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
23:16 / 17.10.02
I don't give money away, mostly because I can't afford it, partly because growing up somewhere with people on the streets on every other street it just gets too much. When I was younger I used to stare straight ahead and pretend beggars didn't exist. The worst part of London was always inevitably the bridge from the South Bank to Embankment. It killed me everytime I walked across it. Now I apologise for being so lame and uncharitable because I just began to feel like I was denying the right to live that the homeless have and it was plain wrong.

Last year the same woman used to beg in the street outside the club I worked in, it was winter time and it got too much because I would speak to her three times a week for ten/fifteen minutes. Sometimes I'd buy her food, give her a cigarette, she's not around anymore but god knows what's happened to her.
 
 
Baz Auckland
02:38 / 18.10.02
I haven't been giving as much in the last few months due to lack of money, but still do give about $5-$10 a month. I can't help it. My mother loved the squeegee kids before the government outlawed them and used to give them money all the time (she has a soft spot for punks) and I just took after it.

I've been busking for over seven years now, and felt guilty that I was potentially taking money away from people who needed it more, so when busking I try to give about 10% ($5 on an average day) to the homeless people around. And I've always had homeless give me some change when I busk, so how can I not give others some? And I always try to give buskers some when they rock.

Toronto has a lot of homeless and it seems to have gotten a lot worse in the last decade.
 
 
bjacques
03:06 / 18.10.02
Amsterdam seems to have more buskers
than beggars. The beggars, at least
on my street, tend to be regulars, aging
junkies or drunks. The ones with dogs are
mostly Spanish or Belgian squatters. They
do a circuit, like Travellers, but without
cars. I almost never give to Amsterdam
beggars, especially junkies, after one of
them broke into my house and lifted about
$150. My taxes pay for them, and I'm ok
with that, esecially since it's rendered
the junkies mostly harmless. The junkie
population is aging, as heroin gives
way to ecstasy among younger drug users.

The buskers here are almost all lousy. I'm
tempted to give to flute players, though,
particulalry the more monotonous ones, since
they're all really piping for Azathoth,
the Blind Idiot God who is the center of
the universe. Just in case.

Last winter, accordions were all the
rage, but the local buskers (Moroccans?)
were slow to adapt, sometimes drowning out
conversation in small restaurants. A few months
later, some Gypsies (or maybe Bosnian Muslims)
arrived with clarinets, playing klezmer music
and their own national songs. Sometimes I
give them money. There are also professionals,
like the Tibetans and the Peruvians, who
sell CDs. I can't stand Peruvian flute
music, ever since my local public radio
station (KPFT) used it as a lead-in for
their pro-Shining Path (murderous thieving
bastards) Peruvian program in the 1980s.
Junkies and other citizen street people
have it pretty good here, with free
methadone for the former and a stipend
for both groups. The Salvation Army
gives them board in exchange for a cut
of their monthly dole, too much for what
they provide, but still cheaper than social
housing.

In London and Houston (Texas), I'm more likely to
give, but there are so many more beggars,
thanks to economic policy forever defined
by Thatcher and Reagan, respectively. In
Houston there are almost no buskers. The
cops are pretty harsh toward them, hitting
them with fines, whereas they just tell
the beggars to move on. A lot still claim
to be Vietnam veterans.

London has the biggest range of buskers,
especially in the Tube. No money for
noodlers; I like plangent jazz/blues chords
as much as the next guy, but I want a tune,
too. And it's got to be unusual or original.
No to scat singers.

Sometimes I give money to London beggars,
especially if they treat their dogs well
(have water and food). The guys at Highbury
& Islington at least sell books. I got
Daniel P. Mannix's "Those About To Die"
for a quid.

East European cities (Zagreb, Budapest,
Prague, Moscow & St. Petersburg) have
a LOT of classical music students and
professionals supplementing their income
by busking, and I give them money when I
can.

So, yeah, I favor initiative. I wouldn't
mind if London's Mayor Ken allowed beggars
as long as they were polite and kept their
general area (say 10' radius) clean.
 
 
Glass
03:10 / 18.10.02
I live in Chicago. There is a markedly high amount of panhandlers here... not so much downtown, but they are everywhere in the Burroughs. When I do occasionally give money, I have a few rules that dictate the manner in which I throw it around--
I never give to people who have nicer shoes or jackets than I do, I never give to assholes, and I never give to the ones who follow you around and sit next to you at Taco Bell telling you their whole life fucking story before they get around to asking for change. I also don't give to people who claim to be 'helping out a friend'... I never understood that one. Is it because of embarrassment? Or do they actually think that I would be more likely to give them money if it is for a friend rather than themselves? Also, never to woman who claim to be pregnant but are obviously not. I've even seen 60+ women try to pull that one.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
07:33 / 18.10.02
If I have "spare change", I give it. If I don't, I don't.

Round in Stokey, there're tons of beggars- I've got to know a few of them quite well, and will always try to help them out (even slipping them the odd five or ten if I've just been paid and am in a good enough mood). Although it's got to a point where one of them (he sits outside one of the shops and always looks after my dog for me when I go in, after once seeing me nearly kill a wino for pouring beer over her while she was tied up outside. Fortunately, I calmed down before I hit the guy) has actually started refusing to ask me for money.

There's a kid just started begging outside the shop below our flat, and I was horrified to find out he was only 14. I know the people who're looking after him, and they're nice enough, but the majority are smackheads, which worries me quite a lot. We buy him food and stuff.
 
 
William Sack
08:10 / 18.10.02
This is obviously a serious subject, but I did read a rather entertaining account of how a vegetarian woman resolved her quandary about whether or not to give money to beggars. In the end she decided not to - "because they'd only spend it on meat."
 
 
illmatic
09:20 / 18.10.02
Fridge: Your dad's not wrong. In fact, if anything he's mistaken about the time scale - it's a lot shorter, it's a change I can recall occuring within my lifetime.

I grew up in London suburbia and started travelling into central London on my own when I was about 12/13 - about 1984/5 - and at this time THERE WERE NO BEGGARS.There were a few old winos sure, but NO ONE under the age of 40. They didn't start appearing on the streets of Maggie's glorious capital until a few years later. Around 86/7 which, funnily enough, was the time Maggie cut housing benefit for under 18's. I can remember the transition.

I remember this whenever people tell me how good Maggie was for this country. It became a much nastier place under her. Anyone remember the News of the World (or might have been The Sun) headline "Pan Handler earns £250 a day"? As I've heard someone say about Ronnie Rey-Gun, her goverment legitimised a lack of compassion, and this kind of journalism just is just social engineering that fits in this narrative. I've never seen anything more spitefui and hate-filled - when people have problems give them an enemey, an easy target for your hate who can't fight back.

What saddens me is that a lot of people younger than me (ie. a lot of people on this board), or people who grew up outside the capital, think that it's fucking normal for us to have beggars/homeless. Well, it wasn't normal or acceptable once - and it could be the same again if there was the political will - but this is about a likely with Tony Blair's goverment as Father Fucking Xmas turning up and giving all the homeless mince pies.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
10:56 / 18.10.02
Well, whatever the causes, I hope we can all agree that the worst thing about the rise in the number of homeless and/or beggars is the inconveniance and distress visited on honest, decent, *hard-working* people like nutella, Deric, woodswalker and Glass.

Jesus...
 
 
The Natural Way
11:05 / 18.10.02
...I was thinking the same thing.

I don't like people giving me shit over money, but, y'know, these people ARE on the streets. Live w/ it.

And as for nutella's "get a job" thoughts...well....dick.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:23 / 18.10.02
Well, we're back to the deserving and the undeserving poor, aren't we? In a sense, you are penalised for not looking wretched enough, because unless you are clearly desperate and fucked you are not "deserving". But at the same time, if you have "brought it all on yourself", then your are again not deserving. It must be a difficult tightrope to walk. "I have to look ragged, or people will think I am a white suburban kid. But if I look too ragged, peopel will assume I'm only going to spend it on heroin".

One of the major results of the increase of mendicants in major cities is, I think, that the charitable bit of our brains has melted. We can no longer give money to everybody who asks us (as I could, for example, when living in Loughborough in the 80s), so, in order to preserve our status as "good people", we need reasons *why* we are or aren't giving money to beggars on such an apparently arbitrary basis. And "because that particular person didn't deserve it" is a very good reason, because that really isn't our fault. The existence of these so-called "professional beggars" is a very good pin to hang that on...
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
11:27 / 18.10.02
Yeah, what he said. Fucking easy to be high and mighty about this kind of thing when you've not come anywhere near it/have support networks all around:

how about a bit of imaginative emapthy people?

How about if your family are the *reason* you're homeless - through violence/abuse etc... you're on the streets, in the case of abuse for example, you're too ashamed to contact any friends you might have. You may have run as far away from home as possible, so have no friends...

You're basically alone, sleeping out in the rain for a few days will do for whatever clothes you're wearing, you'll stink, be in danger of assualt/violence/mugging all the time... how hard is it to hold on to mental health/not to want to block it out with the strongest drugs possible...

God, makes me so mad when people have a 'no wonder they're homeless , they're* all junkies and alcholics' attitude... has always struck me as a lot more likely that 'no wonder they're junkies and alocoholics, they're* homeless'. Fuckwits.


* They being people who have nothing to do with me, and are comfortably on the other side of the fence, nice and objectified/homogenous and far away. Although sometimes they bother me by become people, in *my* world. Just not cricket, is it?

And no, I don't always give money, (the town I live in has the highest proportional population of homeless and street drinkers in the UK) but usually do, as although I don't have much money (and can see situations where, if not for my support networks, I could well be one of 'them'), there's some of it that i'm going to spend on crap. Giving a couple of people 50p in lieu of a pint doesn't seem like a massive hardship.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
11:28 / 18.10.02
"what he said" relating to Runce. oops.
 
 
Ariadne
11:50 / 18.10.02
The road where I work is lined with people sleeping in doorways when I arrive early in the morning - there's no way these people are doing that for fun. Yes, maybe they drink - so would I, if i had to fall asleep on a freezing cold busy pavement.

Why is it called panhandling in the US?
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
11:52 / 18.10.02
I in general tend not to give out money on the streets. Sometimes I'll purchase some local variant of the Big Issue or donate to street artists. However I find it aggravating to be continuously hassled for change. I would be more inclined to help out if I thought for a moment that the money would go in some way towards them getting off of the streets as opposed to feeding a weed or alcohol habit. Alcoholism and drug addiction are a slightly different situation but I'm of the opinion that assistance to this segment of the homeless is better administered rather than blithly handed out without consideration.

For those that decide that choose to "live outside the system" where outside the system means sleeping rough, getting stoned all of the time and begging for money, then I have little sympathy, patience and certainly no generosity.

Maybe I'm cruel and draconian in my views. I've compromised a number of times on my princiapls to ensure that I have a roof over my head and food in the cupboard. Sure you may choose to not do that, after all, it's not my choice to make. But don't expect me to prop up your lifestyle and more than that, don't hector me when I refuse to give you money.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:58 / 18.10.02
(Sound of something whooshing over Special Boy Potus' head and crashing against the far wall)

As a matter of interest, SPB, did you actually read this thread before posting?
 
 
Ariadne
12:04 / 18.10.02
But Potus - do you really think most of the people have chosen to be there? That they could just change their mind and live like good, honest, upstanding citizens if they chose? That they choose to sleep in the rain?

Your $1 today may not help them to get off the streets but treating them as scum who deserve no better isn't going to help much either.

As someone (Fridge?) said earlier, this situation has been created by politics. There have always been some people -- usually older men -- down on their luck but they were only a few, and people tended to look on them relatively benevolently. Now there are so many people begging that it's easiest to decide to despise them as 'other'. But they're not. They're people like anyone else, having a hard time, and to give them money can only help a bit.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
12:18 / 18.10.02
Ariadne's right. and if we're talking about a politically-rooted problem , isn't the fact that certain communities are more vulnerable than others an issue?

Does someone 'choose' this life if due to race/gender/geographic/socio-economic factors they grow up much more likely to end up homeless? and how do they get out of it? If, for example, they're black and/or from an area of extremely high unemployment/housing shortage, from an environment that puts incredible strains on individuals and family networks, conditions that foster high levels of drug use destabilises entire communities, which turns them into war zones because there *are* no/very few choices in life...

And what if, as per my example, they choose life on the streets as preferable to life 'at home' with a violent/abusive/addicted partner/paernt. That they've chosen a life that they feel is slightly safer than what they left behind. Or *shock horror*, weren't thinking terribly rationally when they left.

Does this choice mean that we should say 'tough shit. you've chosen this'?

Draconian? maybe. Moronic and inhumane? Yep. Maybe you can work up to draconian.
 
 
w1rebaby
12:19 / 18.10.02
Instinct says to give money that I can afford to people who seem to need it more than I do, but I would be an utter liar if I said that I had never thought "Jesus, just fuck off and get a job and stop bothering me". More than once. Maybe I was having a bad day. Maybe I'd been ripped off the day before. Maybe I'm a git. Certainly since I've been waged and living in London full-time, I'm much more sceptical and more... more of a bastard I suppose.



The thing about the "deserving vs undeserving poor" concept is that it is actually quite central to how people look at charity. There are a very few people who give to anyone less well off than themselves, and there are some who never give at all, but in general we have criteria. We don't give to people we don't think deserve it.

Yes, the idea is manipulated as an excuse for selfishness, on the personal level (people reinforcing the idea by selective reading of the Mail) and on the policy level as well, where it's even less forgiveable. You can't dismiss the distinction as being intrinsically flawed, though, it's more descriptive than prescriptive here.


What I do find objectionable is what amounts to a two-pronged policy attack on the poor which is a definite Thatcher/Reagan neo-right creation:

1. tell citizens that, when the government provides social services like housing and unemployment benefit, they themselves are being personally charitable and responsible;

2. then mount a media campaign giving the impression that recipients don't deserve it and are cheating the system. Now people feel personally cheated. They think "damn, here I am giving these people money and they're ungrateful cheating sprog-dropping crack-smoking bastards - fuck that, I'll vote to crack down on them".

The idea that, whenever you provide a service on a large scale, there will be a few cheats and that's just part of how it works, has been taken out of the agenda. Social policy is not the same as individual charity yet the government pretends it is, and cynically creates an impression out of lies and misplaced emphasis, with the co-operation of the mainstream media. You end up with a populace that is proud to evade parking fines yet teaches its kids to spit on beggars.

I could rant about it being a part of a culture of individualism but it's not, it's part of a culture that defines individualism by greed.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
12:25 / 18.10.02
Had a dilemma about this once - I was approached by a young girl, I'd guess late teens, on High Holborn just after I'd left the cashpoint - I'd seen her talking to some policemen earlier. She basically told me that she needed to get out of town to get to a hospital, and showed me her injuries (appalling bruising). My dilemma sprang from the fact that the policemen *hadn't helped her* - I assumed that this meant that she was known to them as a homeless girl/drug user/prostitute. But the injuries looked to me as if she was being beaten up - should I not give her money knowing that it would probably end up with a dealer/pimp and not help her in the slightest?

I gave her a tenner, I thought it might stop whoever it was hitting her that evening. I don't know whether that was the right thing to do though...
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:30 / 18.10.02
Of course, another problem is the problem of benevolence. Giving somebody 50p, getting a thankyou and strolling on feels nice and sunny. You are a *good* person. You are doing a *good* thing.

As soon as the person then hassles you for a bit more, then a bit more, then a bit more, you are no longer a *good* person. Because at some point you will be forced to afdmit that your benevolence does not extend beyond a certain point, and usually a point with a fairly low financial value (I probably give about as much to the homeless in a week as I might spend on booze over the course of a single evening. Likewise if people express their dissatisfaction with your decision not to give them anything at all, for whatever reason. You are suddenly made to feel insufficiently philanthropic, and not a good person. Best way to deal with that is to make it clear to yourself and others that the problem lies not in you, but in them. Sorted.

So, perfectly, our cities would be zoned to include an optimum number of mendicants per capita, who had been trained both in craven gratitude for pennies and in dignified silence when passed by.

Another question - addressing the problem, or the roots of the problem, which feeds back into Fridge's excellent points about social policy and individual charity. I'm asking because I have a Direct Debit to Shelter, but am aware that I should probably also be supporting a charity that lobbies for homeless action on a governmental level, as welll as just providing beds and food, the theory being that £5, especially in Britain, will be better spent trying to free up £15 of government aid than on £5 of food for the homeless...
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
12:45 / 18.10.02
Yes I did read the post Haus and is it so hard to imagine that someone may have a differing view. An opinion that doesn't exactly match those of other people is not uncommon in this world of individuals.

I carefully picked my way through my post and not once did I see somewhere that I implied that all people choose to be on the streets. However there are those that do as incredible as that may seem.

No my $1 a day is not going to make a vast difference towards getting people off of the streets. My money to the charities and shelters does. My lobbying at governmental and local authority levels does as well (at least I would like to think so).

They're people like anyone else, having a hard time, and to give them money can only help a bit.

It's probably a massive personal flaw that I hate to see people not trying to take care of themselves. Sitting on the street, begging and hectoring for change just somehow doesn't appeal to sense of help those that help themselves.

No doubt that my attitudes are the sickening product of being a priveliged straight white male from a middle-class background and something that I should endeavour to change.
 
 
William Sack
12:45 / 18.10.02
TBP - just composed a long post then popped back to the board to see others had said much of what I was going to in a much more eloquent way. So, I'll pare it down, not repeat what others have said, and just address on aspect of your post.
Most or at least many of the people who irritate you by hassling you for change WILL be addicts, and they WILL spend your change on booze and drugs. Not weed though - weed won't do jack for the problems they have. I'm guessing that for you drink 'n' drugs is a largely positive experience - a few pints, a pill, a line, a smoke, whatever lubricates social occasions, makes things a bit better, and is just, well, fun. If that's your perspective, then I really don't blame you for thinking that by asking for money these people are taking the piss - and that you're damned if your going to subsidise their reckless hedonism. Fair do's there. However, the reality is that these people aren't exercising a lifestyle choice where they choose fun - they choose oblivion (and do so with booze, crack, heroin, poly-drug abuse etc rather than weed), and if you heard their stories you'd probably appreciate why.
Having said that, it doesn't make the choice of whether to give money or not any easier. I don't object to giving money to an obvious addict because I resent the fact that I will be "propping up their lifestyle", and one they have chosen, but I am rather ambivalent about being complicit in their self-destruction.
 
 
illmatic
12:46 / 18.10.02
"I probably give about as much to the homeless in a week as I might spend on booze over the course of a single evening."

That much? Jesus.

Sorry.
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
12:50 / 18.10.02
Most or at least many of the people who irritate you by hassling you for change WILL be addicts, and they WILL spend your change on booze and drugs.

If this is indeed the case then can I really justify giving money to someone for self-destructive purposes? If so what the hell is the justification because I can't work it out. To me that's like giving a freshly sharpened blade to someone feeling suicidal.
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
12:51 / 18.10.02
That being more directed to everyone rather than H.I.R
 
 
William Sack
13:01 / 18.10.02
If this is indeed the case then can I really justify giving money to someone for self-destructive purposes? If so what the hell is the justification because I can't work it out. To me that's like giving a freshly sharpened blade to someone feeling suicidal

It's a difficult one, I agree, and not one I have worked out myself. Not quite the same as handing a blade to someone intent on suicide, as the self-destructive urge in addiction moves at a slower pace than someone bent on slashing their wrists. Yes, giving £1 which someone will spend on something that does them harm seems ridiculous, but there may be hope that some time down the road that person might turn their life around. Also, the thing that harms them also provides temporary comfort and a refuge from other difficulties they face.

Important qualification - I have no reason for saying "most" people who beg for money are addicts, so I will change that to "many."
 
 
illmatic
13:04 / 18.10.02
Following on from Kit Kat's point, and Haus's and several of the posts below, like a lot of the things that get argued about on Barbleith, there isn't a right thing to do, or a right attitude to adopt. One of the side effects of seeing so much poverty in your face is it stops you being so fucking complacent and wakes you up a bit, which is perhaps why so many people try so hard to ignore them. I guess we all swing from thinking "fuck off will you?" to feeling a bit more compassionate.

TBP - don't you ever feel like that? Maybe begging is the best way to help yourself in that sitution - gets you a meal, a beer or two so you can chill out a bit, maybe even gets you a hostel for the night?

Do you not think you're buying into that whole "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" mentality? What would you do if you were in the same boat?
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply