http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/01/buddy-can-you-spare-a-crime
This is apalling.
Mike Harris days are back again :(
(edited by oldgoat for "appropriatness" Please be more mindful in the future)
Demonizing Panhandlers, Toronto Sun Style...
Thu, 2011-06-02 09:21
#1
Demonizing Panhandlers, Toronto Sun Style...
Thu, 2011-06-02 09:26
#2
Snert
They must feel pretty empowered with Ford in office.
Imagine, "Miller and his socialist wingnuts" trying to get panhandlers off the streets by helping them find someplace to go other than "elsewhere".
Thu, 2011-06-02 09:37
#3
Northern Shoveler
Vagrancy laws were how the unemployed were controlled in the last great depression. If you did not have a permanent address each municipality would roust you along. Then the federal government set up the work camps building roads to nowhere.
The good news is that those work camps produced a generation of activists and most of our social programs are a result of that generations fight back.
Thu, 2011-06-02 10:18
#4
Building more roads also helps the authorities to get to places quicker to suppress popular unrest.
I didn't think we would go to fascism so quickly, but it looks like we have.
Guess it's time for us to put our boots on and kick some ass.
Thu, 2011-06-02 10:28
#5
Guess it's time for us to put our boots on and kick some ass.
Its the only language fascists seem to understand. Every other means of petition that isn't backed up by tangible consequences is seen as a form of pathetic weakness that allows them to continue doing what they do best with total impunity.
Thu, 2011-06-02 10:29
#6
The streets of Canadian cities are filled with the stench and filth emanating from these fascist media rags. They've mutated far beyond Orwell's wildest imagination with his vision of daily two minutes sessions of hate, by treating the population to a ritualized hatefest spanning all day, every day.
Thu, 2011-06-02 11:42
#7
Sorry about that. I would edit it if I could.
Thu, 2011-06-02 14:14
#8
Personally, I think telemarketers are more guilty of "agressive panhandling" than atcual panhandlers are.
Besides, it was already against the law to threaten or intimidate people into giving you money before these by-laws came into place.
Thu, 2011-06-02 14:28
#9
I never hear the same level of outcry and concern when NGOs and students hit the streets to beg passers by for money.
Thu, 2011-06-02 15:46
#10
Snert
I'd be happy if "tag team" tactics were added to the list of behaviours covered by the Safe Streets act. Ever notice how, say, Greenpeace beggars work in teams of two, on opposite sides of a street? NO ESCAPE.
Also, can someone explain why I'm always getting tapped by Sick Kids? Did we stop funding health care through taxes??
Thu, 2011-06-02 16:04
#11
i think they outlaw panhandling for a few reasons:
*to shove homelessness under the rug, out of sight and mind to people so they don't have to think about it
*suburban people are scared of the homeless, like they are of the poor in general. It's a strange complex whereby the rich are scared of being "victimized" by poor folk, when it's really the other way around!
*governments and elites don't want any kind of sympathy generated for those worse off than the rich. They want this out of sight so people don't see homelessness and poverty and think it might be time to do something about it.
Thu, 2011-06-02 16:22
#12
Snert
I'm not saying that all of that is wrong, but it really seems to me that most people walking down the street are just as aversive to charities, NGOs or anyone else wanting "just a minute of your time". "Just a minute of your time" generally means "just a minute of yours to waste when we both know I want some money".
And do you really think that the presence of panhandlers inspires sympathy and a call to action from the public? Really? Because personally, I think that the presence of panhandlers (and the more, the better) does the opposite.
Thu, 2011-06-02 16:37
#13
And do you really think that the presence of panhandlers inspires sympathy and a call to action from the public? Really? Because personally, I think that the presence of panhandlers (and the more, the better) does the opposite.
Except that we're not talking about "the presence of panhandlers" like they are part of the wallpaper. They are people trying to survive. Do I think it would be better if people didn't need to do that? Sure, but I think the way to approach the question is the root causes, not the public image.
Thu, 2011-06-02 16:42
#14
Snert
Oh, of course. I'm just questioning the logic of "the elites" trying to hide panhandlers from the public so that the public doesn't become sympathetic to the panhandlers and demand Socialism. :D
Thu, 2011-06-02 16:46
#15
Oh, of course. I'm just questioning the logic of "the elites" trying to hide panhandlers from the public so that the public doesn't become sympathetic to the panhandlers and demand Socialism. :D
Gotcha. 'scuse the misunderstanding.
Thu, 2011-06-02 17:05
#16
edit: resolved... thanks oldgoat, Uncle John
Thu, 2011-06-02 20:10
#17
Re panhandlers, the most efficient solution is to disintegrate them
Thu, 2011-06-02 23:38
#18
First they came for the panhandlers, then they came for the people on social assistance, then they came for low-wage workers. And finally they came for the middle class, and then something was done about it....
Fri, 2011-06-03 12:28
#19
Ford should just start throwing change at panhandlers. That seemed to work in the past. Oh, right …
Fri, 2011-06-03 12:40
#20
Ford should just start throwing change at panhandlers. That seemed to work in the past. Oh, right …
I presume you are refering to Ralph Klein's little pep talk.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/klein-ralph/
Fri, 2011-06-03 19:04
#21
Refuge
I prefer the panhandlers to the sick kids. In general the pan handlers have a genuineness about being there. They are living their lives. The sick kids reps seem like they don't care about me or the charity they represent, they just get in your face because they are paid to. I have never felt intimidated by a pan handler but I have had several times when I felt crowded and overwhelmed by the aggressiveness of the sick kids reps.
Make a law to get rid of them, not the people living their lives.
Sat, 2011-06-04 18:44
#22
i think one of the things governments do is try to pit different sectors of the poor/working class against each other. that's the whole point of the "welfare mother" scam whereby those not on social assistance are made to believe those that get it are lazy and ultimately profiting from it and making off like bandits with "taxpayer money"...
the idea is, make sure people don't see the system for what it is or they will probably try and change it. With homelessness they portray it as not something created by the system itself, but a bunch of lazy drunks who refuse to better themselves. And we are of course so kind to try and help them despite their intransigence....
i think that's why the point of our economic system is for regular people to be atomized and individuals and not concerned with serious issues that affect us all, while the rich are always encouraged to be highly organized and active in pursuing their interests. governments know people are generally predisposed to help those who need it, and that runs entirely counter to the values of an efficient hyper capitalist society.