One of my reservations about giving money to homeless people is that they might spend it on alcohol or drugs.
I often play the devil's advocate to the stance people take on any subject, especially with my students as part of the lesson (for language usage and articulation).
As a Libran, always trying to see the other side of the argument, I do it to myself as well.
On the subject of homeless people buying alcohol or drugs, my devil's advocate question to myself is: "What's wrong with that? Their lives are miserable enough, so who are we to say they shouldn't try and numb the pain in this way? If they prefer emotional painkillers to food, it's their choice."
It's not always easy to stand that far back and distance oneself that much, though.
Someone I know who's been on state benefits for years went and got a tattoo with "the money that the government owed me". Owed her!? I was shocked by her attitude: it's money the government owed her.
She gets free housing, and the rest of the state benefits package, yet she buys expensive snacks (note: snacks, not staples) for her two dogs -- things like dried liver sausage (which googling tells me is £10–£35 per kg).
Am I to tell myself that I shouldn't object to her spending my tax money on a tattoo and expensive dried liver sausage snacks for her two dogs (among other things -- a long list)?
No comments:
Post a Comment