Quasi-Boom wrote:
the media is corrupt wrote:
Quasi-Boom wrote:
robert- wrote:
"sorry i don't carry cash" and i keep walking
not interested in the conversation and i have zero sympathy for drug addicts
I usually say something like "hey man" and then give them whatever I have, although never more than $20. I don't know why I have that arbitrary cut-off. Seems reasonable, though.
I must have given pandhandlers, homeless or not, thousands of dollars over the years and my many travels across the US.
But I may adopt your policy, Robert. You seem like a nice guy, admired and loved by friends and family. I hear nothing but good things about you. I'm re-thinking things, based on your post.
While I admire your empathy, your behavior, like most liberal policies that are intended to help, actually do more harm.
I never considered giving money to someone who has none a liberal policy. Maybe it is, but I have never thought of it that way when I'm handing a homeless guy $5. It just doesn't register as having any political connotations or impact to me. If I were to see some stats that it is liberals who predominantly give money to the homeless, I'd consider not doing it any more.
As to "harm, it would really depend on the scope of the term as to whether you are correct. I can't see the harm in giving a homeless guy money. No matter what he does with it, it introduces money into the economy, at a minimum. It promotes capital fluidity, and economic utility.
Point taken. You are correct in that conservatives give way more to charity than liberals.
Anyhow, that $5 to your local homeless shelter will do a lot more good than the booze or drugs will do the guy you give it to.
Also ... please everyone ... go to your local supermarket, load up on Goya products, and deliver to your local food bank. That does a good deed and is a small victory against the fascist left who want to silence any with opposing political views.