just wondering

  • Moops@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    I personally do not, but I think it’s a personal decision. I have a background in working for homeless non-profits. If you have a desire to really help and be part of moving towards a solution, find a local group and donate and/or volunteer with them.

    The reality of handing money to someone is at best it’s a band-aid, and more often you’re just buying that night’s substance of choice. No judgement there, if I was homeless and likely not receiving needed medical and mental health treatment, I’d be high and drunk as often as I could too. Hell, I’m high as often as I can be now. Nevertheless though, I feel comfortable choosing not to participate by handing money when asked and I don’t begrudge anyone who does.

  • finderscult@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Yes.

    Yes, they might use it for drugs or alcohol, that’s fine, it’s as important as food sometimes.

    Non profits and charities are great in theory, but most redirect less than 10% of what they receive towards the homeless look at LA’s projects as the most glaring example, it “takes” 10 million+ per single housing unit for temporary housing. Not due to cost, but simply corruption at every level. From the non profits involved to the government itself.

    Giving directly to the homeless skips all that.

    Or to put it another way, you can’t fix the problem or treat symptoms by continuing to give money to the cause of the problem. Giving directly at least treats the symptom.

  • unmagical@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    6 days ago

    Yes, if you have the means.

    I work with a mutual aid group that engages in street outreach. I experience a lot of different cases and pretty much all of them would be benefitted by having more money.

    Some people have a job, but not a home, and are trying to get housed

    Some people have a home, but not a job and are trying to stay housed

    Some people have neither and are trying to stay alive

    Some people have both, but are so underpaid for the area they are in and are trying to stay housed

    Some people are migrants and it is 100% illegal for them to work in the US and their only source of aid is through asking the community

    Not one of them enjoys the situation they are in nor has made an explicit choice to be or stay homeless.

    A lot of people who panhandle stay in encampments. These provide a small community with a lot of support structures for those there. There’s often someone who knows how to cook anything with any source of heat, someone who knows how to treat wounds, someone who knows what each person in the camp needs, and someone who’s plugged into the broader community and can get things for those who can’t (not all food pantries or lines are accommodating for wheelchair users and those with mobility issues can have trouble waiting for hours for food or even getting there). My point being that even if your contribution doesn’t help the person asking directly, it likely helps someone they know.

    And if you’re worried about the whole “they’ll just spend it on drugs” thing, I honestly wouldn’t. Among the people I work with maybe 1/3 of them use drugs and very very few use anything other than weed. Employed and housed people use weed to unwind, why is it so much more evil if you don’t have a house? And if you’re working with the 2/3 of people that don’t use drugs than it’s not really a concern. I do realize that those numbers might be vastly different in areas that were more harshly hit by opioid issues.

  • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    The important act is giving. If you think a dude on the side of the road needs $20 and you’ve got it to spare, there’s no downside to doing that. They may not use it how you like them to, but they will use it how they best can. Sometimes that’s food, sometimes that’s drugs, to keep them from actively offing themselves.

    If you think a charity has a decent track record and can better use those funds to serve more people, donate it there. They’ll use it how they beat see fit, whether that’s food, shelter or enforcement of policies. It may not be how you want it used, but that’s okay.

    Ultimately, give what you can, however you can. Once you’ve given the money, you can’t determine how it’s used, so be okay with your act of charity simply existing by itself, not in comparison to another hypothetical “best” act of charity.

  • VirusMaster3073@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s better to give it, despite the risk of some people just using it for drugs/alcohol (addiction is a health issue anyway)

  • apotheotic (she/her)@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 days ago

    Here is the reality:

    The person is going to use money, whether it is yours or someone else’s, to buy whatever it is that they feel is the best use of that money.

    Disconnect yourself from any ideas of what the money is going to be used for, and just understand that it will be used to reduce their suffering. If that is a satisfactory use of the money that you give them, then give them the money. Consider, at the same time, putting money aside to donate to local causes, some of whom may be helping the homeless.

    Above all though, your money is somewhat valuable, but nowhere near as valuable as your time and effort. Volunteering at these same local causes is even more valuable than whatever spare pocket change.

    Just don’t turn into a “but they’re going to buy drugs with it!” person

  • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 days ago

    I really can’t see a downside. If they seem to be obviously homeless or they’re actively asking for help, they probably need it. Though it’s extremely unlikely that your meager contribution will be the change that suddenly allows them to magically overcome poverty and become middle class home owners with well paying jobs, that doesn’t really make them need it any less. Whatever they use the money on, it’s going to be what they need in the immediate term, be it drugs or food or anything really and unlike others this is the only way they can really get that money so they do need people to occasionally part with it. You’d only give it to them because you had it spare anyway and it’s not going to make them more homeless than they already were. If the concern is that it’s not addressing the root personal problems that put them individually on the street or the root social problems that put many on the streets, that’s completely true but if you’re serious about doing that you’re going to need more than the couple of bucks in your pocket anyway. That’s going to be concerted massive political will and financial effort and several people’s lifetimes worth of work all at the same time, besides you can always involve yourself in some way in such efforts and hand over spare change. The only times I can really think of where it makes sense not to give directly are: you can’t afford to do it, the physical circumstances of handing it over are dangerous/impractical, you don’t care about homeless people or other people in general or you subscribe to some nasty Malthusian ideas and think yourself somehow benevolent for condemning people to destitution as some kind of “cruel to be kind” doctrine in which case you’re unlikely to have given this a lot of thought anyway and don’t really face much of a dilemma.

  • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I will leave it at people can, if they have the means and want to. You’re never obligated, even if someone is using aggressive panhandling tactics.

    I play pinball, so I’m one of the disappearing folks that often has a little bit of pocket change left over. If I see someone panhandling and I am feeling generous, I’ll share some. If I don’t have any, am still feeling generous, and they’re outside of somewhere serving food, I’ll ask if they want something. Usually people say yes, sometimes they say no. Never buy something with the specific intent to give it to a panhandler without asking them first - it’s rude to presume. If you legit have something extra that you didn’t expect that is fair game to offer - in those circumstances I always add “If you don’t want it, that’s cool” to make it clear I’m not forcing it on them/I won’t think they’re rude for not taking it.

    If I’m not feeling generous, I don’t give anything.

    Whatever anyone does with anything I gift them is their business. It’s fucking rough out there.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s better to buy them food or give them homeless care packs. There are good lists online of things you can give to homeless folks that will help them a lot, socks are a main staple.

    I give all three depending on the scenario. I almost never have cash on me, so I don’t hand out money very often just because of that.

    It’s important to show them compassion and care. Homeless people are often treated like trash by most people. Saying a kind word to them and giving them a small gift might be the only instance of kindness they experience for days, possibly weeks.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    I keep some cash in my pocket specifically in case I run across someone asking for money.

    And then I live like a hermit, almost never going anywhere, so it’s rare that I actually have occasion to give in that way, but you know.

    Also, in my experience, it’s not necessarily homeless people who need the money. I’ve seen people (claiming they’re) close to losing their housing who are hoping to raise enough money panhandling to make their rent this month.

    Of course, if you are struggling financially, it’s definitely very reasonable to decline to give in that context. I suppose if anything feels “off” as well. (Though I wouldn’t want to bias folks in the direction of thinking that there may be any reason to be more suspicious of people in need than others.) But over all, I do think it’s something that can make a hugely, vitally positive change in someone’s basic wellbeing.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    No. It would be better to give your money that fixes the underlying issues why the person is homeless in the first place.

    There are a lot more homeless people about than the one you’re giving money to, and giving money to one homeless person will not fix their situation.

  • SanndyTheManndy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    A good charity would be able to get the most out of your money. At least you know the chances of your $20 turning into drugs, alcohol, or gambling is minimal that way. Making money takes time and effort, and you owe it to yourself to see it spent wisely.

  • The summer blues...@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    I don’t know which are real and which are part of some scam ring. In my area there are rings of women with children selling candy. When they reach the last stop they regroup and discuss with each other then shill candy on the next train. I never give money but I buy food if they ask. I offered to buy a sandwich from dunkin for a man and he screamed at me about how he needed muthafuckin money!!! and ever since I don’t offer anything anymore to anyone.

  • hahattpro@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    You are sponsoring the RICH and the GOVERMENT to fuck up the miniority part of society.

    Dont do it. Let’s government do their job. You already do your share: Your TAX and your community work.