Begging - Do you give?

[SOHO]

charity starts at home and for me, ends there.

[ubermaus]

charity starts at home and for me, ends there.

 

I give a little here and there to things that benefit communities like canal trust or Macmillan who do good work.

[loraward]

I would. Dogs are supposed to be looked after and cared for by owners with the means to do so. Dogs live in domestic homes with proper food and shelter. Dogs are to be walked regularly, groomed and bathed.

 

"plenty of free food" - what a joke. Scraps and leftovers from bins? yeah, really good for a dogs health that.

 

"free vet care" errrm, I think not. Someone has to pay for that "free" service and if its not the owner of the dog who is it? Oh yeah, us working people having to donate OUR money to fund it.

 

Dogs also restrict a homeless person from getting access to all and every available accommodation option as many places will not accept pets. Therefore they are restricting and creating their own difficulties which in turn puts more strain on the homeless services.

 

So yes, I very much do begrudge so called "homeless" people sitting there having a pet. If they "allegedly" are in such a position that they cannot sort out themselves with food and shelter how they hell are they supposed to care for an animal.

 

If anybody else had a dog and kept it outside 24 hours a day and fed it nothing but scraps and leftovers people would be screaming the place down and getting the RSPCA involved, yet somehow its perfectly acceptable for our "homeless" person to have one.

 

Nonsense.

 

For thousands of year dogs have managed just fine living outside, eating scraps and not being groomed and bathed.

[Happ Hazzard]

If you give to beggars they might use the money for booze or drugs, but if you give to charity you know the vast majority of the money is going into the pockets of the directors of the charity. I reckon you're better off cutting out the middle man and giving directly.

[JFKvsNixon]

If you give to beggars they might use the money for booze or drugs, but if you give to charity you know the vast majority of the money is going into the pockets of the directors of the charity. I reckon you're better off cutting out the middle man and giving directly.

 

I may have misunderstood your post, but it looks like you're suggesting that you'd be better off giving the beggars booze and drugs!

[Plain Talker]

I would. Dogs are supposed to be looked after and cared for by owners with the means to do so. Dogs live in domestic homes with proper food and shelter. Dogs are to be walked regularly, groomed and bathed.

 

"plenty of free food" - what a joke. Scraps and leftovers from bins? yeah, really good for a dogs health that.

 

"free vet care" errrm, I think not. Someone has to pay for that "free" service and if its not the owner of the dog who is it? Oh yeah, us working people having to donate OUR money to fund it.

 

Dogs also restrict a homeless person from getting access to all and every available accommodation option as many places will not accept pets. Therefore they are restricting and creating their own difficulties which in turn puts more strain on the homeless services.

 

So yes, I very much do begrudge so called "homeless" people sitting there having a pet. If they "allegedly" are in such a position that they cannot sort out themselves with food and shelter how they hell are they supposed to care for an animal.

 

If anybody else had a dog and kept it outside 24 hours a day and fed it nothing but scraps and leftovers people would be screaming the place down and getting the RSPCA involved, yet somehow its perfectly acceptable for our "homeless" person to have one.

 

Nonsense.

 

Nonsense, indeed, dogs only "need" bathing with any regularity if they are those excuses for dogs that women with more money than sense carry around in their handbags.

My dogs don't get bathed, unless they have rolled in something particularly unpleasant, like fox poo, detergents strip the natural oils from their fur, and cause problems with thinks like waterproofing the fur.

 

---------- Post added 16-05-2015 at 21:35 ----------

 

Anyway, many of the homeless people's dogs are looked after better than the homeless people look after themselves.

[bex1]

They loose their kids and get a dog instead because it's more financially viable. One beggar told me to cheer up the other day.I thought it was funny so I bought him a can on the way back

[Mister M]

I read about a homeless man in London who was befriended by a cat, & the cat helped him turn his life around. A one off story perhaps, but a great one nonetheless:

http://nypost.com/2014/06/28/how-a-street-cat-helped-a-homeless-man-turn-his-life-around/

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Street-Cat-Named-Bob-streets/dp/1444737112

[Cyclone]

If anybody else had a dog and kept it outside 24 hours a day and fed it nothing but scraps and leftovers people would be screaming the place down and getting the RSPCA involved, yet somehow its perfectly acceptable for our "homeless" person to have one.

 

You think it's okay for people to live outside for 24 hours, but an animal with a fur coat can't take it?

[CleverLad]

I think the best thing personally is to give them food. If you really want to help someone out who is homeless, why not go and buy them a cheap sandwhich or a nice warm drink. Like others have mentioned, if they are truly homeless you would imagine most of them would appreciate something to eat or a warm drink.

 

I don't agree with giving money to homeless people, as for many, I suspect it would be spent on alcohol or drugs. I think giving money to decent charities is better than giving money directly to homeless people, but as mentioned in the opening post, it's a shame such a large chunk of your donation is often going to pay staff and executives.