But it is an interesting question. — Sir2u

What's interesting about it? We just don't know where the money will go, so we don't give. If we had assurance, that it would be spent on necessities or the betterment of their situation, then wouldn't you be more inclined to give them money then?

Surely, we do. To some extent. — Posty McPostface

OK, to what extent? Who should be making the decision or how should it be made? Is there a standard formula for it?

is it just me who thinks its kind of akward giving them money. you know that who think with eye-contact, taking out your wallet, and so on. why is that?! :roll: It just gives me a wierd feeling, but I dont know why.

OK, to what extent? Who should be making the decision or how should it be made? Is there a standard formula for it? — Sir2u

Speaking politically then isn't the rational solution, mores socialism?

What's interesting about it? — Posty McPostface

Are there beggars where you live? I don't mean the guys hanging around asking for money, I mean real beggars.

We just don't know where the money will go, so we don't give. — Posty McPostface

So if you knew then you would give?

If we had assurance, that it would be spent on necessities or the betterment of their situation, then wouldn't you be more inclined to give them money then? — Posty McPostface

Alcoholics NEED booze, would it be moral to help them acquire it?

is it just me who thinks its kind of akward giving them money. you know that who think with eye-contact, taking out your wallet, and so on. why is that?! :roll: — Aleksander Kvam

They aren't all thieves. Just saying.

So if you knew then you would give? — Sir2u

Yes.

helping is by no doubt the humaine thing to do. but people should allways a freedom to not participate in it.

no, no, that wasnt what I meant! I dont know

its just hard to explain

it might just be the attention I feel im making. unwanted attention I must add.

Yes; I agree. But, on an individual level, why is this? — Posty McPostface

On an individual level? I'm not sure what you mean by that. Like gloaming said, we naturally have closer relationships with those whom we know best, interact with most often, and most intimately. We trust them more than others, care for them more than others, are more connected. Although, again, I'm sure you already know this. As an individual, I am no different than most others in this respect. I would give my own mother preferential treatment over a stranger on that basis.

give them a joint instead :)

Even if this means voting for a socialist who wants to introduce something like Universal Basic Income, or some other redistribution scheme of politics? — Posty McPostface

Yes, because Universal Basic Income is... universal -- for everybody. No group is being favored. Besides the UBI isn't a benefit program for unfortunates. It's a macro-economic plan to deal with the consequences of structural economic change.

Speaking politically then isn't the rational solution, mores socialism? — Posty McPostface

Speak emotionally then. Social mores have been the backing of many a maiming and many mutilations
in the begging industry throughout history.

What would be more immoral? Having an aging man dressing up as a clown to tell jokes on a bus and then ask for a few coins or giving the old timer a few coins while he sits by the road begging?

Making our personal sphere of interaction and interest would , as some pointed out, do little or no good. The fact is that there should be no asking for money. A functioning society would take care of its own as a society not as individuals.

I think alot of instinct would have us save own child even if the nobelest thing to do was save the 5 others

maybe we should teach him to fish?

As individuals, do we really have a moral obligation towards the rest of humanity? — Sir2u

No, we don't because 7.4 billion people is a bit much to take on. Besides, "the rest of humanity" is a non-group made up of non-people. Maybe we have an obligation to the unfortunate people who live on the north side of town, or maybe not -- but at least the 700 people who live up there are numerable and knowable. We can decide whether their situation is deserving or not: Maybe they are all liars, thieves, knaves, scoundrels, crooks, and pimps and deserved to be arrested en masse. Or, maybe their situation deserves assistance -- a tornado wrecked their part of town (and, coincidentally, they are no more dishonest than anybody else).

maybe we should learn him to fish? — Aleksander Kvam

:grin: Do you have the time to teach him? That is what needs to be done. Handouts from the government do not solve the problems. Make people that ask for money as a way of life learn to be a productive member of society would help more.

I would rather give some spare money to an old man or woman that cannot help themselves than to my daughter to buy more tennis shoes with. But I don't get into the places where these people live too often.

Handouts from the government do not solve the problems. — Sir2u

Sometimes they help, if structured right. I'm an example.

I think solving the problem may need more then just money. we both know that

What would be more immoral? Having an aging man dressing up as a clown to tell jokes on a bus and then ask for a few coins or giving the old timer a few coins while he sits by the road begging? — Sir2u

The old timer sitting in the dirt begging was previously a clown subjecting innocent people to the horrors of incompetent clowning. He was beaten up and thrown off the bus by the indignant and by no means indigent suburbanite riders. It was awful watching the women stomp on him with their spike heels.

The old timer sitting in the dirt begging was previously a clown subjecting innocent people to the horrors of incompetent clowning. He was beaten up and thrown off the bus by the indignant and by no means indigent suburbanite riders. It was awful watching the women stomp on him with their spike heels. — Bitter Crank

that sounded pretty brutal.

deleted: catholic worker website didn't work

We can decide whether their situation is deserving or not: — Bitter Crank

That is the best any of us can do. But if you had nothing to spare after those you love were taken care of, how far would you go to help?

Or, maybe their situation deserves assistance -- a tornado wrecked their part of town (and, coincidentally, they are no more dishonest than anybody else). — Bitter Crank

A few years ago my house was almost wrecked by a 7.8 earthquake. The government offered assistance and then suddenly there was a forced takeover/change of president and it never came. I don't think that it was immoral of me to ask for money, but I did not expect it to be given to me. Some of my workmates actually did make a collection and I was rather embarrassed about receiving it.

Not everyone is dishonest, but not everyone has a valid reason to be asking for money from strangers.

Sometimes they help, if structured right. I'm an example. — Relativist

:lol: OK, if you say so.

:rofl: I cannot think of anything to say to that. Maybe when the tears dry up. :rofl:

To be honest, I am not sure if there is anything we need to do. — Sir2u

There is. How can you be satisfied with things as they are? Is this your version of utopia? I hope not.

Most people I know help others to the extent that they are able, if not financially, then by giving them things which they need or by helping to look after themselves in some way. — Sir2u

But that's anecdotal evidence, so a relatively weak point. And it contradicts my own anecdotal evidence, which effectively means that they cancel each other out. I actually find yours hard to believe, which makes me suspect that we're interpreting "the extent that they are able" differently. Maybe you mean something more like "the extent that they can live with".

As individuals, do we really have a moral obligation towards the rest of humanity? — Sir2u

When the situation calls for it, yes. If there were a deadly virus which would wipe out the rest of humanity, and you could easily prevent it, wouldn't you feel obligated to do so?

Yes, because Universal Basic Income is... universal -- for everybody. No group is being favored. Besides the UBI isn't a benefit program for unfortunates. It's a macro-economic plan to deal with the consequences of structural economic change. — Bitter Crank

I think UBI, is the ultimate is increasing our so-called 'sphere of interest' in a capitalist based economy. The very ultimate being communism, I think. I could be wrong.

it might just be the attention I feel im making. unwanted attention I must add. — Aleksander Kvam

Any and all attention is good, @Aleksander Kvam, especially for the poor and needy.