All posts in the topic Reactions to Panhandling (was " Petty Crime") (Short link)
Summary
- There are 11 posts — by 11 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by John Wilson at Jul 19 16:04 UTC
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Bob McLean <grmpllc@comcast.net> wrote:
> A quick follow up: Rick, I can understand how you read my "garbage"
> comment, it was not artfully phrased. I was not referring to the people as
> garbage, but their harassing activity, which is definitely bad for business.
>
First, I appreciate the clarification. But I remain puzzled over the
reaction (and the depth of the reaction) that some folks have when a
panhandler comes up and asks for money. As I wrote earlier, I've been able
to simply say "Sorry, not today" and go on with my business. If the first
entreaty is under the guise of "Excuse me, sir, I have a problem" (or
similar introduction) I'll generally listen to the problem and if it's clear
that it's a request for money, I'll usually say "Sorry, I'm afraid I'm
unable to help."
In St Paul, my experience is that usually wraps it up.
And this is not intended to single out Bob -- but I'm truly curious to hear
from others who are bothered by panhandlers' presence in Downtown. In
particular, I'm curious about what provokes negative feelings/emotions when
another person asks for money or other financial help.
Is part of the reaction a discomfort over having someone simply make
the request?
Or, is part of the reaction fear that the situation might escalate and
pose some risk of physical harm or embarrassment?
Is part of the reaction a desire to have only interaction with people
we know (or want to know) and the panhandler's presence upsets that
protective "sphere of privacy" that is treasured?
Or is part of the reaction caused by middle-class conventions that
"nice people don't beg" and thus the panhandler is an outlier in our world
of nice/not-nice people?
I suspect that those who are non-plussed by a panhandler's entreaty would
not think twice if another person came up and asked for directions to a
nearby museum, library, office building, etc.
I'll add again that I think panhandlers are symptomatic of larger cities but
that the volume of panhandlers and their "aggressiveness" seems far lower
here than in the cities to which I've traveled.
Rick Mons
as Forum Participant
A couple of weeks ago, a well dressed man walked up to me in a Menards
parking lot and asked for a couple of bucks for gas. Said he had left the
house without his wallet, was embarrassed to ask, and even offered to pay me
back. I gave him a couple of bucks and my card. Of course, I never heard
from him again. My policy about people asking for money is: if I can
afford to throw the money away, why not give it to them. This was the first
time I felt stupid or "had" about it. I don't like to be manipulated. I
prefer straight up requests for handouts. All you have to do is "just say
no." I think the problem is we don't want to have to deal with other
people's real or perceived financial situation. It's also why we don't talk
about class in the United States.
I have to admit that I have been blessed and never had to panhandle. Somehow,
through it all I have been able to make ends meet.
My general reaction in my mind to panhandlers is why don't you get "real" work?
Except for very rare cases, there are no excuses. America is the land of
opportunity. I worked with a man who came to America on a crowded boat not
knowing a soul or a word of English, lied about his age to get into a school,
and 5 years later was working at a good paying job for 3M Company. I have seen
a woman who lost a leg and went on to run the Twin Cities Marathon. There are
thousands of stories of folks who have worked hard to over come many
adversities. Right now we have seen a black man upset one the most
sophisticated political machine of modern times. 4-5 years ago he was an
unknown councilman. Now, he has raised hundreds of millions of dollars and is
the odds on favorite of becoming the President of the United States.
As I said there are no excuses!
Dean Sheldon, St. A. Park
----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Mons
To: St. Paul Issues Forum
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:48 AM
Subject: [SPIF] Reactions to Panhandling (was " Petty Crime")
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Bob McLean <grmpllc@comcast.net> wrote:
> A quick follow up: Rick, I can understand how you read my "garbage"
>
"if I can afford to throw the money away, why not give it to them." Because you are enabling dysfunctional behavior. "The experience of numerous professionals and service agencies finds that money given to panhandlers often only enables self-destructive behaviors like alcoholism and drug addiction. One former panhandler and addict has even stated, 'Giving money to a panhandler is like giving a gun to someone who is suicidal.'" "According to studies, giving money to panhandlers does not help those in need because: # Cash given to panhandlers will most likely be used to buy alcohol or drugs. # Most panhandlers are NOT homeless. # For some, panhandling is a profession and at times, studies show, a lucrative one. # Homelessness is not the problem for truly needy panhandlers, but rather a symptom of underlying problems. They need help, not handouts." http://www.downtownmemphis.com/domain/cleansafe/cleansafe_panhandling.asp There are ways to help people in need. Enabling panhandlers to buy alcohol and drugs is not one of them.
After almost a decade of living downtown, I would echo Rick's
experience that I don't fear those asking for money. At most it has
been a slight inconvenience, and I simply tell people I don't have
money, and look to help them in other ways, like giving to charities,
or pushing for policy change.
As housing advocates will tell you, between 1/3 and 2/3 of the
homeless also have a job, depending on economic conditions. That's
largely because in recent decades, the minimum wage has fallen far,
far behind the pace of inflation. Meanwhile, housing, transportation
and health insurance costs have all dramatically outpaced inflation,
hitting low-income households very hard.
I do think one could make an argument that having a substantial amount
of panhandling can make a community a less attractive place to live
and do business. But it is just one among a very wide variety of
indicators of community vitality, which we attend to in varying
degrees and ways. The question is how to respond responsibly, and
solutions can take many different directions.
But I believe the foundation of any ethical response that honors
people has to be attending to some of the factors that we know have
caused homelessness. Homelessness has risen as we've seen changes in
state and national realities. We've become tolerant to paying wholly
unlivable wages, failed to develop transportation alternatives,
dramatically reduced our support for chronic mental health issues, and
dramatically cutback our social support infrastructure generally.
The levels of homelessness and panhanding are at its core about a weak
community, about our shared weakness. The Minnesota of my youth would
have never tolerated what we see today.
Charlie Swope wrote:
> There are ways to help people in need. Enabling panhandlers to buy alcohol
and
> drugs is not one of them.
Mr. Swope is absolutely right. To his comments I will add that allowing
people to panhandle for drugs, alcohol and purposes of fraud is not a
humanitarian act. It furthers the destruction of panhandlers and of civil
society.
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
OK, I figure someone with my last name should comment on a thread about Petty
Crime. First, no one that commented on this or the prior thread has said that
they would eagerly change places with a panhandler. It ain't a good life
apparently, even if Charlie thinks it is a lucrative profession (although I
tend to agree with the tone of his posting). An unscientific survey by City
Pages showed that the panhandlers they interviewed all considered it the worse
"job" they had ever had, and would like to be working for wages if they could.
Second, why should we assume that all panhandlers really don't need the money
or that not giving money will cure an addiction? How many people will we pass
by just to prove that we will only give to the "worthy" ones? So, I do a little
volunteering at Dorthy Day, I give money to charities that provide social
services, I support government programs that provide affordable housing and
social services, including housing for those such as the Hennepin 100 (A study
finding that the 100 most expensive social service cases in Hennepin county
cost about $1 million each annually. Conclusion, it would cheaper to house
these people with support services rather than treat them in emergency rooms,
jail them, and provide inadequate services on a piecemeal basis), and I give
almost everyone that asks my spare change. It is an inadequate response on my
part, but it is what I feel I can do. I don't think I should "judge"
panhandlers.
Finally, my experience with most social service organizations is that they are
pushing self reliance and responsibility to get people on their feet. But,
almost everyone recognizes that the many "isms" and risk factors also play an
important role is creating poverty, homelessness, and despair. Panhandling
should not be considered a Petty Crime, but a symptom requiring a community
response to a social dysfunction. Unfortunately, we are not there yet.
Douglas Petty
MacGroveland
Douglas Petty wrote:
> Second, why should we assume that all panhandlers really don't need the money
or that not giving money will cure an addiction? How many people will we pass
by just to prove that we will only give to the "worthy" ones? So, I do a little
volunteering at Dorthy Day, I give money to charities that provide social
services, I support government programs that provide affordable housing and
social services, including housing for those such as the Hennepin 100 (A study
finding that the 100 most expensive social service cases in Hennepin county
cost about $1 million each annually. Conclusion, it would cheaper to house
these people with support services rather than treat them in emergency rooms,
jail them, and provide inadequate services on a piecemeal basis), and I give
almost everyone that asks my spare change. It is an inadequate response on my
part, but it is what I feel I can do. I don't think I should "judge"
panhandlers.
>
>
Emergency medical services provided by emergency rooms are a significant
financial drain on county and community hospitals. Much is
uncompensated care is provided. Legally the hospital is required to
assess the patient's condition and stabilize his/her condition.
Socially, this is the right thing to do, however a more effective
solution is one that addresses why some of these ER visits are made in
the first place. In a lot of cases it is because the patient is
underinsured or uninsured, for whatever reason, and cannot afford
preventive treatments, or even earlier non-emergency interventions.
When it turns into an emergency, things get really expensive really
fast. Universal health coverage (whether via a single payer system, or
a baseline coverage system backed by the government that augments the
existing payers and allows room for people to purchase fancier coverage
packages from private insurers) is a way to improve access to preventive
health services. Universal coverage is not a new concept...we already
have social protections in place for winter home heating, and for the
elderly. The point is expanded coverage can actually work to reduce
costs below it is for our existing rescue-rescue-rescue system rather
than a prevention system.
The anecdote of a MD (doctor) and MPH (public health) professional
walking along a river comes to mind. They both see people coming down
the river and drowning as they go by. The MD jumps in the water and
tries to save/resuscitate the victims. The MPH starts running upstream
away from the MD, who yells at him to give him a hand. The MPH replies
that he's running upstream to find out why people are falling into the
river in the first place, to put a stop to the problem at its source.
Funding wise, our health system system is very strongly biased towards
downstream emergency interventions (heroic efforts) when upstream
preventative action would eliminate many of those expensive situations
from happening in the first place. Public health spending is under 3%
of total health spending. Finally, there is an important role both for
medicine and for public health, the point is an appropriate mix of
resource allocation can work wonders at reducing total health care costs
(and making making changes to the allocations does not mean existing
services are cut, just that new services are focused on the areas that
have the fewest resources).
THOMAS MEEMKEN wrote:
> My panhandling pet peeve is beign at a shopping area or service station and
aproached by a person say they ran out of gas, or had a blown tire with their
wife and newborn baby in the car and no money for gas or tire repair. The best
part is that the last one who gave me this line was on his way home to Coon
Rapids from St. Johns Hospital and he ran out of gas by the Sun Ray shopping
Center that I was at.
>
> Thats also true of my experience in Manhattan. I ride the subway in the
Bronx,Queens,Brooklyn at all hours, and feel safer than certin areas in the
Twin Cities.
>
> Tom Meemken
> Battle Creek
About a month ago I was in downtown Minneapolis early one evening when
someone approached me. He kept his distance so as not to be
threatening, saying he needed gas money to drive up to Brooklyn Park.
It wasn't entirely clear if he was a panhandler or not, however I like
to do my due diligence when offering direct financial assistance, so I
asked if I could see his car first. He became upset and said 'No I
don't want to show you my car, and you just don't want to help because
I'm black.' He then immediately left me to pursue someone else just
down the street from me and had no interest in reasoning with me. It
was bothersome that he'd assume my response was based on race, but it
was not. I have no problem with helping people in need, regardless of
race. However, I am not interested in supporting someone's drug or
alcohol addiction (I suppose government seizures of some of these items
could be rationed out if it really came to that), so usually when I am
approached my response will be to offer some non-monetary assistance
like bread, food, or a meal. Sometimes the offer is taken up, but it
has probably been refused just as many times. On the other hand, it has
been suggested that the drugs or alcohol some people seek may be one of
the only pleasures they still experience in life, so even giving them
cash that you know will go for that use is reasonable. I don't claim to
have an answer to what to do in these situations other than do what you
think will be the best and most appropriate response.
Reactions from panhandlers can vary with locale, time of day and personality.
In Dayton, Ohio, last month, a man accosted me as I was returning from a late
(11 p.m. or so) hamburger dinner to my hotel. He wanted a bus ticket to
Cincinnati and a couple of bucks for a meal.
I walked with him to the bus station (across from the hotel) to buy him the
ticket. No such luck. The ticket window had just closed, the agent told him.
They would reopen at 6 a.m. or so. So, no dice. No ticket purchased by me.
After some vigorous entreaties from him, I gave him his requested couple of
bucks toward a meal.
Panhandlers play the odds. Sometimes they score.
Thanks to Mr. Swope for publishing his citation on how giving money to people who ask you for it is a bad thing... "According to studies, giving money to panhandlers does not help those in need because: # Cash given to panhandlers will most likely be used to buy alcohol or drugs. # Most panhandlers are NOT homeless. # For some, panhandling is a profession and at times, studies show, a lucrative one. # Homelessness is not the problem for truly needy panhandlers, but rather a symptom of underlying problems. They need help, not handouts." http://www.downtownmemphis.com/domain/cleansafe/cleansafe_panhandling.asp Problem is, there are no citations there. I like Rick's point that panhandlers are 'icky' for middle class people, for a number of reasons. The panhandler demonization that Memphis is pushing on it's website Let's see what they say - they're druggies, they're somehow falsely representing themselves, they make the big bucks, and that last point? The really needy ones aren't really in bad shape because they're homeless, but they got other stuff going on, so don't help them because they need help? Anyway - I think that's more prejudice against the poor (which, as Nela pointed out, we don't talk about) than good science or public policy. I've emailed Memphis to see what their studies were like. I'll let you know if they come up with anything.
I can see it from both sides of the cup, so to speak. I've been homeless
approximately 8 of the last 20 years, though not all at once. I have a home
now. I've always had an income, just not always the discipline to save money.
When I have a place, I make paying my rent first priority. Only once did I give
up a place due to financial problems. Otherwise it was usually because of
harassment from neighbours. Once it was because I broke up with a girlfriend
who was so mean near the end of our relationship I still call her my girlenemy
or my domestic opponent -- 12 years later. However, once on the street, I
tended to stay on the street a long time. One year the first major time, four
years the second, and three years the third, and several minor times I can't
bother to count here. I don't do drugs. Even though I drink on occasion, I'm
hardly an alcoholic. When I was on the street, I'd typically get a motel room,
order a pizza, and drink one day a month. My main "addictions" were bus rides
and fast food. I don't handle social conflict well (that's why I was homeless
in the first place), so I didn't panhandle, except for a two week experiment in
1990 in San Francisco which averaged me $2.00 an hour. It wasn't worth it for
the exposure to people's nasty attitudes. Of course, as I said, I had an
income. If I was totally destitute, I probably would have panhandled on a
regular basis. On the "citizen" side of the cup, I can understand why some
people hate panhandlers. Some people blur the line between begging and
strong-arm robbery. Some are just really offensive and harassing about it. I do
feel people should have a legal right to beg but not in a harassing way. The
Minneapolis law seems to have done a good job at differentiating the two, in
practice as well as theory. Please don't judge people who beg unless you really
know why they're out there. I know someone from my travels who's a fugitive
living under a false name. Lacking a valid S.S. number he can't work OR get
assistance. He doesn't drink or do drugs either. There are various reasons why
people are on the streets -- don't judge what you don't know -- PLEASE!