Give to Charities for the Homeless - Not Beggars

The homeless are not a new problem. There have always been losers in the game of capitalism. Human economic systems developed as groups of people began to solve the problem of having enough to eat through organized agriculture. Since it was no longer necessary for every person to hunt and gather their own food, surpluses began to accumulate. It was these food surpluses that allowed the first division of labor. Suddenly the better carpenters, masons, bakers, herders and countless other ancient tradesmen began to emerge and devote all of their time to their craft while farmers grew the food to feed everyone. Cities formed, civilization became ever more intricate and money evolved from the need to exchange a wide variety of goods and services with utterly different values. Inevitably in this system came people unable or unwilling to contribute. Some of these people had no skills, some were lazy and some were simply unwilling to work. Having nothing of value to offer the people of the first cities, they received nothing in kind except what charity their families, friends and sympathetic strangers were willing to offer them. They were the first beggars.

Although the complexity and scale of this capitalist system has increased by untold leaps and bounds, it is fundamentally the same story today for the homeless. In addition to the ranks of the disabled and unwilling to work are now the mentally ill, alcoholic, drug addict and traumatized war veteran. The nature of their plight, however, remains fundamentally unchanged. They have little to nothing to offer a highly technical material world and therefore they are relegated to charity. The world over beggars and homeless unfortunates are the byproduct of capitalism in every nation. In Rome ragged women kneel on blankets in the street holding children or dogs on their lap and affecting a tearful lament. On the streets of Prague men bow completely prostrate with their eyes to the ground and their hats out to catch whatever alms the unseen stranger might see fit to throw at them. Throughout Europe gypsies have made a career out of begging for money, recruiting their children to stand with the alms cup in some public square while grown parents loiter on a bench smoking cigarettes. Here in New York men stand, weak kneed, in the street accosting each passerby personally trying to engender some sympathy. Some beggars simply rattle a plastic cup or chant "change please" like a mantra; they have become automatons without hope, reduced to the pangs of their basic human necessities. Others are confrontational and ask with accusation as though the passerby who refuses them was responsible for their plight. Although most nations make some provision for the homeless-soup kitchens, overcrowded shelters, food and clothing drives-only the most socialist and communist of countries have managed to tackle this problem to any significant degree.

There are so many different ways to look at the homeless problem. Firstly, I believe that this is a problem that will never be solved. It is insoluble. The scriptures tell the story of how a prostitute came to Jesus with a bottle of perfume and proceeded to wash his feet with her hair. The disciples were outraged and declared that the woman should have sold the bottle of perfume and given the money to the sick and poor. Christ surprised them by saying "You will always have the sick and poor-you will not always have me." Every species has a segment of its population that is unfit to survive in the niche that that species occupies. In nature those unfortunates die before they can reproduce and we call it natural selection. Natural selection does lead to a bettering of species through the elimination of unfit individuals. The application of evolutionary theory to human beings is called Social Darwinism According to the thinking of such theory perhaps the homeless are just such a segment of the population. Should we simply let the homeless suffer and die?

I don't believe in an absolute application of Social Darwinism toward the homeless. The grandeur of mankind lies in the fact that we are not completely subject to the laws or trends of nature. As much as we adapt to our world, we adapt our world to us as well. The magnificence of a society lies in the provision that it makes for those who cannot care for themselves. Society has a moral responsibility to care for the mentally ill, physically disabled and orphaned segments of its society. Here is where the plot thickens, however. What provision do we make for those who can care for themselves but wind up homeless due to their own refusal to work or chemical dependency?

There is a certain allure to the concept of refusing to work. Everyone dreams of possessing independent wealth large enough to not have to work. Beyond that we sometimes yearn for someone to take care of us. However, work is man's lot in life. Food, clothing, shelter, medicine and every technical innovation still do not make themselves. While we are far removed from the production of the material necessities and conveniences that make modern life possible, the concept remains essentially unchanged. The farmer is still in the field toiling endlessly to feed the world. The carpenter has been replaced by the construction company, but hardworking men and women build our homes nonetheless. We, each, exist by the grace of those others out there who labor to produce. The producers in turn, rely on a return of their own labor in the form of money for their own survival and comfort. The value of each person's labor is determined by what the highest bidder is willing to pay, which may not always appear a fair system, but no one person can be entrusted to set the prices-the failure of the Soviet Union taught us that lesson. The one element that makes capitalism the fairest system is the fact that it runs on free will. No one is forced to do their job. The farmer could stop tilling the field and the construction crews could pack up and go home at a moment's notice. Every person has the right to not work. Yet each one of us bears the responsibility of our actions. It is simply a fact of reality that if we refuse to work for anyone no one is likely to work for us. Thus being homeless can be viewed as simply the natural consequence for an adult segment of the population that refuses to work.

The argument can be made, however, that many of the homeless are willing to work but simply don't want to work in this society according to its rules. This argument, too, has its allure. The social contract-the agreement to abide by a set of rules, regulations and laws determined by the majority and enforced by the government for the greatest good of everyone else-in American society was determined long before any of us was born. I have resented from time to time the fact that there is no more open land upon which to settle. I cannot hack my life out of the wilderness or climb into the endless mountains to prospect for gold. I am forced to make my way in a world in which every piece of land has been claimed by someone. For the citizen of the industrialized world, the hunter gatherer lifestyle has been abolished. Is this fair? In a roundabout way, it is. The world without social contract is a world of anarchy. Almost every anarchic society is a place of violence ruled by the strong at the expense of the weak. The industrialized world could never enjoy the standard of living that it has or support the population that it does without the governments, laws and property rules that it has. Much like traffic laws prevent freedom on the roads, they also allow large amounts of people to get where they are going each day in relative safety-which may be an even more valuable form of freedom.

There is another reason that man must needs work. In addition to the basic elements of survival, man's identity and happiness depends upon the work he chooses. Idleness and boredom are the lot of the unemployed. Working breeds a sense of purpose, productiveness, humility and self-esteem. There is a profound pride that comes with the knowledge that we can interact with the world successfully and eke out our survival. Many retirees or lottery winners have found, much to their dismay, the indispensability of work to the healthy human psyche. Thus, in addition to not supporting themselves, the homeless find themselves in a situation that robs them of their identity as men. No self-respecting person wants charity and many would rather die than ask for and accept it. For some homeless folk and welfare recipients it is only the needs of their children that drive them to accept the fruits of another's labor.

For me, it is this last point that I believe responsible for the involuntary loathing I feel for the homeless. I have never believed what many religions and societies preach-that man is an abject creature who is basically weak, stupid and immoral. I have seen too many of the world's great works, read too many written labors of genius and heard the inspiring creativity of gifted musicians too many times to believe this propaganda. So once said the Jedi master Yoda, "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter." I believe in mankind and nothing repulses me more than the man with no self respect. When I see the beggar in the street I feel an intense anger toward someone who could sink so low. As I said, I can't help it. Though most people will not admit it, I know that I am not alone in feeling this way. These negative emotions are exacerbated by hearing the same petulant supplications daily from the same people. I know that many of the beggars that I see have serious psychological, physical and emotional problems that make them unable to work. I also know that some indigents have sunk so low that they are in no shape to go on job interviews. I understand that people can be caught in a rut so deep that they cannot, with a simple exertion of will, climb out-not without serious help. Still, when I see the beggar, I picture the child that such a man must have been-an ordinary child with hopes and dreams like any other. I feel angry and sad that such a child's optimism was so horribly betrayed by the weakness and self-indulgence of the adult. Pity is such a horribly misused and dangerous emotion. Pity allows us to enable vice, weakness and evil so often in this world. So many homeless people are actors that affect the very image of what it means to be pathetic, and thus earn an unearned living for their performance. I know not all homeless people are like that, but how is one to tell?

Thus I never give anything to anyone on the street. I don't care how cold it is or what sob story I hear spun to beguile me of my hard earned money. I don't feel responsible for the fate of grown men and women. I did not put them on the street and I do not prevent them from getting out of their predicament. There is plenty of room in the global economy for them to participate. But what of those unfortunates who cannot get off the streets on will alone? Giving money to the homeless on the street does nothing for them and only eases one's own conscience slightly. A dollar given to the bum on the corner that you see every day on the way to the subway will buy that bum a cup of coffee or part of a sandwich but may also contribute to a bottle of liquor or drug fix. No matter what need the alms satisfies, the self-same need will inevitably come back and the same bum will want the same dollar on the same street corner the next day. Thus nothing is accomplished. The people who give to beggars out of pity thus contribute to the problem of homelessness with their own good intentions. Giving to a beggar helps enable that beggar to not take steps to right their situation for another day. Giving money to a beggar also denies the same contribution to legitimate charities that could use the money to buy food and clothing in bulk, erect and maintain shelters, hire doctors and create outreach and employment programs that can truly help the indigent. These charities are always underfunded, as are most charities, but if these organizations received the money given every day on the streets, it would really help alleviate their financial anemia.

If everyone stopped giving money to beggars on the subway and on the street, and instead contributed the same money to the legitimate charities for the homeless, most of the indigent would follow the money. People will not allow themselves to starve and thus the truly helpless would be funneled to real outlets that can help them. Those who refuse to work might finally give up their recalcitrant ways, get cleaned up and seek gainful employment. I know that there are many homeless people, probably the majority of them, who would love to get cleaned up, get a job and get started on a new life and I would like nothing more than the same thing for them. I am not advocating neglecting these people, just using our money in a productive way to affect real change, instead of purchasing our peace of mind with a quarter on the corner every day. If anyone is so abject as to not seek real help that is offered to them in getting off the streets and futilely persists in begging strangers, they should be allowed to reap the consequences of their actions-contempt and starvation. Too often responsibility for such immaturity and laziness is borne by those humble masses who work for a living. No one has the right to willfully take advantage of the workers of New York or any city.

But how do we get people to stop giving money on the street? I am a writer and thus a huge advocate of free speech so I don't believe we can make it a crime to beg for change. I do think however, that we can levy enormous fines on those who give their money directly to beggars. Some cities have done this already, much to the chagrin of some civil rights organizations. The proceeds from the fines would then go directly to the aforementioned charities. Thus, through common sense and a little governmental coercion, perhaps we can finally do some good and help to truly combat the homeless problem. As Christ said, we will never be completely rid of beggars, but we can actually do something proactive for a change instead of enabling bad behavior and whining about how nothing ever changes. If such social programs as I have advocated were implemented on a widespread basis I would be more likely to contribute more money to them. I would also welcome back the recovered bums and beggars as they reclaim their rightful place among the self respecting human race.