Hacker News Reader

Comment by yodsanklai | Hacker News Reader

> if you truly want to help them but don't trust them with your money?

why not?

not sure about the US, but in Europe you often have people begging on streets who are actually working for a group of (often foreign) criminals, who then collect the money and maybe provide the beggars with modest shelter/protection. There were speculations it could be a case of human trafficking.

Obviously that's a whole different kind of homelessness to what the article above is describing.

Because when an addict wants something, they'll lie. Even if they should really use the money for a sandwich, they'll buy the 40 first. Not to say all homeless are addicts, but when they're asking you within walking distance of a liquor store...

I'd rather buy them food or a (non-alcoholic) drink. I rarely have cash on me anyway so I've just had a guy throw his food on my bill when I went into a convenience store before.

I've literally told a guy I'd go into Wawa with him and buy his lunch, but he admitted to my face he wanted the money for the liquor store next door.

When you feel like shit and your life isn't going so great, your self-control isn't exactly great. I'd rather be a positive influence than an enabler.

EDIT: and just for some perspective, I unfortunately used to work in a liquor store in Ortley Beach, NJ where I saw a lot of shit and also have lots of, uh, substance abuse issues in my family. Not to mention NJ has a pretty bad heroin problem in general and it's currently fucking up my hometown.

It doesn’t matter what they’ll spend it on. Don’t pretend to be a micro-political arbiter of societal health or the well-being of someone you don’t even know, and just afford them the bare minimum of dignity. Give them money if you can: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/10/why-you-sho...

“But what if they are part of a gang, or spend the money on $thing_i_disapprove_of?” You can’t know that. Don’t pretend to. Just treat them like humans, not guilty-until-proven-innocent caricatures of social maladies.

> Don’t pretend to be a micro-political arbiter...

By the fifth time a friend or family member hits me up for cash, I'm going to start talking to him about the root cause of his cash flow issues. There may be advice, help, references, etc. that I can help with. Because that's what friends and neighbors do, not because I'm political.

We're not talking about friends and family here, though. That's a clear different situation.

Not always. I've had homeless family. I've had homeless friends.

Regardless, if a stranger hits you up for money five times on five different weeks, you still have similar issues. At some point they don't need a meal, they need a way to feed themselves.

In Seattle my friend and I used to always give these two homeless guys our change from the supermarket.

Once my buddy asked them, instead, what they needed from inside. The guy asked for a drink, and he bought them a drink: "Man, are you kidding me? I asked you for a drink. And you went and got me this ! I don't want that . I want a drink."

Some woman in the parking lot saw us and explained to us that they often sleep at a nearby shelter, and that they have access to meals every day.

I guess we thought we were really helping them, but realized we weren't really doing much more than encouraging their behavior.

I wish there were code camps for homeless. Or xyz_marketable_skill camps for the homeless. I know these wouldn't help everyone, but I would feel a lot more sure about the marginal benefit they provide.

I know it is sad. But there is a lot of value in an approach which provides opportunity.

Up on Cap Hill, there used to be this homeless guy that would walk up and down the street, picking up all the garbage on the sidewalks and the gutters. I offered to buy him lunch and he refused--he said he didn't want to be any trouble and could get meals. I told him I'd buy him whatever he wanted from the undercover-Starbucks that is up there, and he agreed. I always remember that guy's eyes and smile when he sat down and drank that coffee. I sometimes I wanted to cry for him. I wish there was a better way for him; he deserved it.

> I wish there were code camps for homeless

I think it is patronising, not charitable, to treat homeless people as "just like you, but unlucky/lacking opportunity".

It downplays the serious problems that put them there, by casting them as under-performing versions of yourself.

Are you sure patronizing is the right word here? Treating someone as you would yourself betrays the definition of patronizing.. So I'm not sure what you mean by that? It however does seem patronizing to assert, as you say, that they are not people just like you but who 'have serious problems that put them there.'

The argument has been made that a majority of people in their life will experience an episode of what can be called mental illness. Why does America have higher instance of homelessness than other countries? It cannot only be that we necessarily are genetically have greater predisposition to mental illness.

Some people suffer more than others, and for those that are truly disabled, I would hope that our society will truly care for them, but everyone should first be given opportunities.

> It however does seem patronizing to assert, as you say, that they are not people just like you

Depends what you mean. If you mean "they are not people" I don't assert this at all. If you mean "they are people who are not like you" I did assert this. How is that patronising, especially given that they are homeless, and you are not - It is attributing the difference to small, surmountable differences that find partonising.

Consider whether you also find "white man's burden" problematic. Treating other people like inferior versions of yourself doesn't help them.

> a majority of people in their life will experience an episode of what can be called mental illness

That's a very general statement. I can just as well claim that a majority of people in their life will experience an episode of what can be called "problems".

But are the types of mental illness that many american experience, the same as those affecting homeless people?

> Why does America have higher instance of homelessness than other countries

Which countries? looking here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_...

It says American homelessness is 0.18%, compared to 0.38% for the UK and 0.42% to Germany.

I don't really agree with you about all of this. Everyone has their own journey, but we are not so different. We are all just people. I think your view is actually closer to patronizing--well, by definition it takes a view that, while being nice to them, that these people are less equal, which is exactly what patronizing is.

But you are right about that homeless statistic for Americans. I personally can't even believe it is right given what I have seen with my own eyes--and I've been to those countries, and volunteered at homeless shelters in America.

> just afford them the bare minimum of dignity

I find begging undignified, as is being drunk/high. How does enabling help?

> You can’t know that

What Kantian BS. You can't know the opposite either. "Do no harm".

> Just treat them like humans

I don't give random strangers money normally.

I think the linked article answers your statements more effectively than I could. You should read it. But I'll try anyway.

> begging undignified

That's the point. It's so undignified that the people doing it likely do not consider it a choice. Saying "I won't give you what you want because I know what's best for you" is compounding that situation with infantilization/patronization.

> Kantian BS/"Do no harm"

The categorical imperative doesn't help you decide one way or the other here, because you have no information other than someone asking you for money. Giving the money could hurt or help. Not giving it could hurt or help. There is no clear "rational" (Kantian) or Hippocratic ("Do no harm") choice here. Absent that clarity, unless you want to defend defaulting to inaction, make a moral choice to preserve someone's dignity.

> I don't give random strangers money normally.

Maybe you should, especially when they are literally begging you for it on a street full of people who ignore them or treat them like shit all day.

If a person is an addict, not giving them the object of their addiction is best for them. I do know this. If you want to call that "infantilization", fine - but you already agree they have little choice - so it is you choosing for them; So which is infantilization?

The basis of "patronizing" is an invalid assumption of incompetence - in this case the assumption that an addict cannot rationally control their addition is perfectly valid. As for " I know what's best for you" - I'm sure the addict know what's best for themselves too - they just can't control the impulse to do not do it.

> There is no clear "rational" (Kantian) or Hippocratic ("Do no harm") choice here

> unless you want to defend defaulting to inaction, make a moral choice to preserve someone's dignity

This appears to be a contradiction - there is no clear choice, but we should default to action?

I don't see why "dignity" (which I don't agree with btw - I feel being drunk/high is just as undignified) is a winner over Hippocratic inaction.

> Maybe you should

You are ignoring the context of what I said. You suggested denying homeless money is not treating them like "people", but I don't give none-homeless strangers money either, so why would you consider refusing to giving a stranger money on demand as inhumane?

I've met and helped provide food for plenty of homeless people. Not in a shelter or similar, but out where they are at night when they're going to sleep on the concrete, sometimes we'd wake some of them up so they know we're there to help them however we can. Many of them accepted our food, a small enough number refused and kept asking for money. Sometimes we went out of our way to buy them a bus ticket if they asked for money for the bus ticket, and never found them again after that. Other times it was obvious what they'd do with money if we gave it to them because they spoke as if they were drunk and smelled like it. We did more than just provide food but the point is, sometimes the people helping the homeless have known them for over a year and have noticed their habits, and know when not to give money.

But the bigger point is most people assume money to be the only way to help someone, sometimes offering food and water is helpful too. We've ran into families that asked us for food when we were not even out feeding the homeless as well.

They may spend it on cigarettes, alcohol, drugs, etc. Or even be exaggerating/faking their circumstances.

  They may spend it on cigarettes, alcohol, drugs

Sure, but so what?

Doesn't a person have a right to escape his miserable circumstances for a short time?

Sure, food or shelter are certainly the more wholesome option. But who am I to judge a person's morality for what he does with a couple francs that I just gave him?

Well, if I am giving my money to a homeless guy begging on the street/public transport, I for sure will not encourage him in his destructive behavior. It means me contributing to his self-destruction with my money. Simply no. How hard is it to understand this?

Personally, I give sometimes few coins to street musicians, but that's it. Homeless in Europe never struggle for life, there is a vast social net that can help them in various ways, if they want. Giving money means confirming that this is affordable lifestyle, and something they should continue doing.

I don't think the expectation is that they may budget a measured amount for alcohol or other drugs, but that by providing them with the means to get more of those things, one may play a small part in what prevents their escape from said miserable circumstances.

But does turning a blind eye help them escape any better than a few dollars and some camaraderie?

It's sad that this is getting downvoted here. We are talking about people in miserable circumstances, and while vices are a longterm negative, I, an educated disciplined and well off person, still can't reliably resist them when I'm feeling down. To begrudge these people their vices is inhuman.

> Doesn't a person have a right to escape his miserable circumstances for a short time?

Yes but not on my dime. I'm entirely happy to pay (directly or via taxes) to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, get them medical care and clean clothes.

But I really don't think buying them cigarettes and light beer is improving their situation in a meaningful way.

> Sure, but so what?

All those things are harmful.

> Doesn't a person have a right to escape

What if those circumstances are created by the escape?

> But who am I to judge a person's morality

I'm not judging the addict, I'm judging the enabler..

Drugs

5 dollars or whatever you give doesn't really buy much in terms of drugs, I suspect.

There's a reason the term nickel bag exists.

I suspect you haven't particularly looked very hard, then

Reply on news.ycombinator.com