Le 4 mai 2021, la plateforme Yahoo Questions/Réponses fermera. Elle est désormais accessible en mode lecture seule. Aucune modification ne sera apportée aux autres sites ou services Yahoo, ni à votre compte Yahoo. Vous trouverez plus d’informations sur l'arrêt de Yahoo Questions/Réponses et sur le téléchargement de vos données sur cette page d'aide.
Do you think that owners of large amounts of commercial property should build shelters for the homeless?
A few nights ago encountered a man on a downtown sidewalk who asked me if I knew of a place he could sleep for the night. The temperature was bitterly cold. He was polite, He was not drunk and he did not smell from alcohol. He was not pushy. I suggested that he stay at the local Salvation Army, but he said that the Salvation Army, (which is fundamentally a religious organization), would not accept him because he had a drinking problem. I asked him where he had slept the night before, and he told me that he had spent the night outdoors beside a public building because it had a vent from which the heat escaped. I then told him to consider an automated bank teller, because it is what I would do if I were in that situation. He told me he thought he would go along with that idea. I later began to fear that I might have given him some wrong advice. I began to wonder whether extending one's time in such a place might result in a bigger price down the road. I wonder how friendly the police are to people they come across in such circumstances. I do not own the place where I live and do not have permission to allow others a shelter for the night.
Many of the people who own business property in town appear to be wealthy. A number of their offices appear to be vacant. The buildings still have to be heated and lit. A shelter for the homeless would be relatively small in size and it would not required large amounts of fuel to heat. I am sure that the public would be happy to drop in varying amounts of money to keep it maintained.
The owners of business blocks frequently are guilty of slum lording. They often charge exorbitant rent, which forces occupants and businesses to close down or to relocate. At the same time, they receive recognition for their donations to registered charities. It is not clear how far some of these registered charities benefit others. A shelter for the homeless would be more tangible proof that their donations are really being used for the larger good.
8 réponses
- ㄅ4и∂Я4ノ4и∑Lv 7il y a 1 décennieRéponse favorite
Nice thought but no, because the property belongs to them and it's up to them what they do with it. When it comes to the "public" giving away their hard earned cash for what you suggest I think the pot would be quite empty, human nature being what it is.
- jm1970Lv 6il y a 1 décennie
As an employee and member of the Salvation Army, he was not turned away for a drinking problem.....90% of the people in the shelters have one.......
He was most likely DRUNK and not allowed in.
That is a nice ideal, until someone falls and slips and sues the company for their good help!
- CinnaLv 7il y a 1 décennie
The fact they they wound become open to law suits if they allowed them on the property would deter most people from doing it.
- My ZooLv 7il y a 1 décennie
It would be the right thing to do but unfortunately people are selfish and it's all about money to them.
- stevemxusaLv 6il y a 1 décennie
there are 50,000 homeless in just the Los Angeles area--its time to eat the rich.
- BikerChickLv 7il y a 1 décennie
NO, I DO NOT.
When YOU become wealthy, YOU can do this, but you have no right telling anyone what they should do with THEIR money.
- Anonymeil y a 1 décennie
Yes , that would be so normal but this world is not normal.
- Anonymeil y a 1 décennie
no