[paulcole]

>"sorry, not today"

How does this not encourage more panhandling (aka "bad behavior")? You're implying that maybe you'll have something for them tomorrow despite the fact that you never will.

Does saying that do anything other than make yourself feel better about not "actively ignoring someone"?

[akvadrako]

What would be a better thing to say? You don't want to start a conversation or be too rude, but also want to acknowledge them.

Personally, I try to ignore panhandlers to discourage it, but that is kinda like protesting elections by not voting. It feels a bit too much like apathy.

[Fargren]

Panhandling is probably bad enough that it discourages itself. There are reasons not to give, but I don't think you reduce panhandling by not giving, so "discouraging" is not a good reason. Hopefully some people will manage to get enough to move to something less bad.

[ams6110]

Talk to anyone who works at helping the homeless or impoverished, they will tell you that the vast majority of panhandlers are substance abusers looking for just enough money to get high. They are not doing it to eat (community kitchens are free) and they are not doing it to save up for something less bad.

[Fargren]

I would wager that changes a lot by locale. There are plenty of places without such a thing as community kitchen, where if you don't have money at the end of the they you are not going to eat.

And I also don't believe you are doing any favors to poor drug addicts by denying them access to drugs. The whole situation is shit, and there are forms of altruism that are much more effective than giving to panhandlers. But I have much trouble seeing it as "encouraging bad behavior". As I said, it's going to happen regardless.

[akvadrako]

Why would you say that? One person doesn't make much difference, but naturally panhandling follows the law of supply and demand like anything else.

[tmnvix]

> What would be a better thing to say?

"Sorry"