7 ms·

> People often ask me what they can do to help the homeless and I always say, "Just look around you!" When someone has so little, it doesn't take much to help.

> People often ask me what they can do to help the homeless and I always say, "Just look around you!" When someone has so little, it doesn't take much to help. You can start by not judging the homeless. This indeed where it all starts. There are so many voices telling us that these people aren't human, but deep down these rationalizations are just trying to cover the uncomfortable emotion we feel when we see a fellow human who is down on luck. Even if it's just $1 or a granola bar we can give, it can make a huge difference in someone's day. After all, the crisis they are going through is objectively more important than my comfort.

closeparen 8y ago
This may work when the concentration is low. I’d estimate 15-20 homeless people on the daily walk between my front door in SOMA and the Muni Metro. Often in relatively dense tent encampments. I’d feel pretty weird giving to one and not the others on the same block. Especially since it’s probably the same people day in and day out. It’d take some serious preparation before going out the door to pack enough for everyone, and then stop every few feet to deliver it. At an even lower level than compassion fatigue, it’s logistics. If only there were some sort of professional, centralized entity to collect some of our money and distribute it equitably.
- harias 8y ago
  Charities? Some waste too much money on administration, but I think the smaller ones are pretty good.
  - dexterdog 8y ago
    True, but few of them waste 1/10 as much as the government and they all work off of willful contributions.
- cujo 8y ago
  I understand what you're saying, but you're literally saying you feeling awkward is more important than someone having food that day. Sure, it's not the most efficient or probably effective, but giving a little bit does make a difference.
  - PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
    >you feeling awkward is more important than someone having food that day Have you ever spent any money on something that would make you feel less awkward that you could've donated to help feed the hungry? Have you ever bought new clothes when second hand would've worked and you could've donated the difference to feed the hungry? Have you ever spent money eating out when you could've saved money by cooking and donated the difference to feed the hungry? I wonder if there is anyone who could answer no to such questions?
  - Kalium 8y ago
    Let's consider a proposal, then. A simple approach. Whenever you encounter a homeless person, stop and interact for a bit. Treat them as a human being, deserving of respect and dignity and humane treatment as a friend and neighbor. Find out what they need. Give the at least enough for a meal. I'm going to assume 5-10 minutes and $10 per person per encounter per day. Given that I pass at least 20 of my neighbors experiencing houselessness on each leg of my daily commute, I'm looking at $400 a day in donations and upwards of three hours. This may be sustainable for you, but it would quickly leave me unable to afford to eat myself. And that's assuming everything always goes perfectly, which my experiences living in an area with a sizable population of my neighbors being unhoused suggests may not always reliably be the case. With this pointedly ridiculous hypothetical in mind, it may be worth considering that people have to choose their own boundaries, in their own lives, and for their own reasons. Your heart is in the right place - compassion and kindness matter! - but it's possible that shaming people for choosing their boundaries might not be the most productive of all possible uses of your time and energy.
    - Nomentatus 8y ago
      I choose one out of the many, and it doesn't have to be every day - or every week; and I do this only when I have some real time to spend to talk, in case a conversation gets deep, which can happen and is a good thing. At least a third of the time I bring say cherries or a couple of bananas (scurvy from Vitamin C deficiency is not uncommon for homeless people.) The food donations would be more common except that I don't always carry food, and I try to avoid theatrical and practiced begging, since that's more likely to be for drugs so won't stop for the first apparently homeless person I see. I don't feel weird "giving to one and not the many," since I've read some Kant and know that I have no moral obligation to do the impossible; I don't even think I have an obligation to do so much that I start to hate doing it, and might quit. I don't mean to be unkind, but "I can't help everyone." and "It might feel weird" do seem like rationalizations to me. The guy I've sat with most had a serious (obvious impact) brain injury, and when I last talked with him, he was drinking while contemplating whether he should go to a meeting that had been set up with his son, who he hadn't seen since his childhood. He was very worried his now-adult son might not like him. I told him (on the basis of previous our conversations) that he should be proud of himself; he was shouldering a huge burden better he would than most of us would. That it didn't really matter whether his son "got that" or didn't; he should go to help his son understand the world, and understand himself. I have no idea whether he ever met with his son or not. Break some boundaries, experiment a bit, you don't have to go overboard.
- megaman8 8y ago
  SF just passed 300 million/year measure that's supposed to help the homeless and that's in addition to the 240 million/year of funding that's already there. Both of those combined exceeds the budgets of most cities. First I would say, let's figure out how to use that money so that it's actually working. 540 million/year is enough to give the 7000 homeless in SF 77,000$ per year. Let's put that to good use and make sure it doesn't end up in administrative waste before throwing more $ at it.
  - alistairSH 8y ago
    Are those numbers correct? If so, that's insane. For $77k/year, SF should be able to house every single one of them with money to spare.
    - manfredo 8y ago
      The latest tax increased it from 30k to about 60-70k. As to why it's doing so little, there's a variety of explanations. Some say that homeless often have mental or drug abuse issues that keep them from being able to live on their own. Others (including the mayor) say that the money is more than enough, and we need more accountability of what we already spend. 70k is about the median wage of a single person in SF.
      - alistairSH 8y ago
        Even losing half the bureaucracy, that leaves 35k/year for actual aid. Toss half of that at misc care and other programs. 17.5/year left for housing. Not much, but should still be enough for group home type arrangements. Or, at least I would hope so. I've never been involved in these programs on either side, but it's amazing that $70k/year might not be enough to house somebody.
        megaman8 8y ago
        1/2 for bureacrazy? that sounds like a lot for just overhead
- rbanffy 8y ago
  > distribute it equitably. <sarcasm>You communist</sarcasm> I was having a discussion a couple minutes ago about the situation of Cuban doctors in Brazil and the simplistic solution some supporters of the far-right government proposed - to give citizenship to the ones who take a test to validate their degrees. Unsurprisingly, not that many would be attracted by the moving from a country with nearly zero crime, assured retirement and free education and healthcare from cradle to grave to one that's violent and just elected a xenophobic, homophobic and racist president. Life is much more complicated than that.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  If only there were some sort of professional, centralized entity to collect some of our money and distribute it equitably. Here ya go: https://www.catholiccharitiessf.org https://www.catholiccharitiessf.org I used to make regular donations in person when I was able to. It’s eye-opening to see what they do. One day a random woman walked in because she’d pooed herself due to a medical condition. She was immediately whisked away to be showered, given clean clothes, and fed. No questions asked.

closeparen 8y ago

This may work when the concentration is low. I’d estimate 15-20 homeless people on the daily walk between my front door in SOMA and the Muni Metro. Often in relatively dense tent encampments. I’d feel pretty weird giving to one and not the others on the same block. Especially since it’s probably the same people day in and day out. It’d take some serious preparation before going out the door to pack enough for everyone, and then stop every few feet to deliver it. At an even lower level than compassion fatigue, it’s logistics. If only there were some sort of professional, centralized entity to collect some of our money and distribute it equitably.

harias 8y ago
Charities? Some waste too much money on administration, but I think the smaller ones are pretty good.
- dexterdog 8y ago
  True, but few of them waste 1/10 as much as the government and they all work off of willful contributions.
cujo 8y ago
I understand what you're saying, but you're literally saying you feeling awkward is more important than someone having food that day. Sure, it's not the most efficient or probably effective, but giving a little bit does make a difference.
- PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
  >you feeling awkward is more important than someone having food that day Have you ever spent any money on something that would make you feel less awkward that you could've donated to help feed the hungry? Have you ever bought new clothes when second hand would've worked and you could've donated the difference to feed the hungry? Have you ever spent money eating out when you could've saved money by cooking and donated the difference to feed the hungry? I wonder if there is anyone who could answer no to such questions?
- Kalium 8y ago
  Let's consider a proposal, then. A simple approach. Whenever you encounter a homeless person, stop and interact for a bit. Treat them as a human being, deserving of respect and dignity and humane treatment as a friend and neighbor. Find out what they need. Give the at least enough for a meal. I'm going to assume 5-10 minutes and $10 per person per encounter per day. Given that I pass at least 20 of my neighbors experiencing houselessness on each leg of my daily commute, I'm looking at $400 a day in donations and upwards of three hours. This may be sustainable for you, but it would quickly leave me unable to afford to eat myself. And that's assuming everything always goes perfectly, which my experiences living in an area with a sizable population of my neighbors being unhoused suggests may not always reliably be the case. With this pointedly ridiculous hypothetical in mind, it may be worth considering that people have to choose their own boundaries, in their own lives, and for their own reasons. Your heart is in the right place - compassion and kindness matter! - but it's possible that shaming people for choosing their boundaries might not be the most productive of all possible uses of your time and energy.
  - Nomentatus 8y ago
    I choose one out of the many, and it doesn't have to be every day - or every week; and I do this only when I have some real time to spend to talk, in case a conversation gets deep, which can happen and is a good thing. At least a third of the time I bring say cherries or a couple of bananas (scurvy from Vitamin C deficiency is not uncommon for homeless people.) The food donations would be more common except that I don't always carry food, and I try to avoid theatrical and practiced begging, since that's more likely to be for drugs so won't stop for the first apparently homeless person I see. I don't feel weird "giving to one and not the many," since I've read some Kant and know that I have no moral obligation to do the impossible; I don't even think I have an obligation to do so much that I start to hate doing it, and might quit. I don't mean to be unkind, but "I can't help everyone." and "It might feel weird" do seem like rationalizations to me. The guy I've sat with most had a serious (obvious impact) brain injury, and when I last talked with him, he was drinking while contemplating whether he should go to a meeting that had been set up with his son, who he hadn't seen since his childhood. He was very worried his now-adult son might not like him. I told him (on the basis of previous our conversations) that he should be proud of himself; he was shouldering a huge burden better he would than most of us would. That it didn't really matter whether his son "got that" or didn't; he should go to help his son understand the world, and understand himself. I have no idea whether he ever met with his son or not. Break some boundaries, experiment a bit, you don't have to go overboard.
megaman8 8y ago
SF just passed 300 million/year measure that's supposed to help the homeless and that's in addition to the 240 million/year of funding that's already there. Both of those combined exceeds the budgets of most cities. First I would say, let's figure out how to use that money so that it's actually working. 540 million/year is enough to give the 7000 homeless in SF 77,000$ per year. Let's put that to good use and make sure it doesn't end up in administrative waste before throwing more $ at it.
- alistairSH 8y ago
  Are those numbers correct? If so, that's insane. For $77k/year, SF should be able to house every single one of them with money to spare.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    The latest tax increased it from 30k to about 60-70k. As to why it's doing so little, there's a variety of explanations. Some say that homeless often have mental or drug abuse issues that keep them from being able to live on their own. Others (including the mayor) say that the money is more than enough, and we need more accountability of what we already spend. 70k is about the median wage of a single person in SF.
    - alistairSH 8y ago
      Even losing half the bureaucracy, that leaves 35k/year for actual aid. Toss half of that at misc care and other programs. 17.5/year left for housing. Not much, but should still be enough for group home type arrangements. Or, at least I would hope so. I've never been involved in these programs on either side, but it's amazing that $70k/year might not be enough to house somebody.
      - megaman8 8y ago
        1/2 for bureacrazy? that sounds like a lot for just overhead
rbanffy 8y ago
> distribute it equitably. <sarcasm>You communist</sarcasm> I was having a discussion a couple minutes ago about the situation of Cuban doctors in Brazil and the simplistic solution some supporters of the far-right government proposed - to give citizenship to the ones who take a test to validate their degrees. Unsurprisingly, not that many would be attracted by the moving from a country with nearly zero crime, assured retirement and free education and healthcare from cradle to grave to one that's violent and just elected a xenophobic, homophobic and racist president. Life is much more complicated than that.
reaperducer 8y ago
If only there were some sort of professional, centralized entity to collect some of our money and distribute it equitably. Here ya go: https://www.catholiccharitiessf.org https://www.catholiccharitiessf.org I used to make regular donations in person when I was able to. It’s eye-opening to see what they do. One day a random woman walked in because she’d pooed herself due to a medical condition. She was immediately whisked away to be showered, given clean clothes, and fed. No questions asked.