CreamyGoodness
Well-Known Member
I hope this isnt too controversial, but I need a little consensus here.
I consider myself an ethical person, but I also realize that I have never been homeless, and as broke as I have been I have always eaten three times a day.
So today I pick up the newspaper, and on the front page I learn that at the South by Southwest festival, homeless people have been hired to carry a portable router and be human "hot spots." One man had a tshirt that read "Hello, my name is Clarence, I am a 4G hot spot." There is no set pay structure, but the company involved suggests $2 per 15 minutes of wireless access. Clarence and his colleagues keep what they earn.
This was decried as dehumanizing and cruel by some people in attendance, and a bruhaha has been raised on Twitter in its regards.
Am I just an out of touch middle-class jerk? It seems to me that while this might be kind of a crappy job, its just that, a job. These people, of whom I might add are being refered to by their names, are receiving pay (tips) in return for a service. Also, while many homeless people are avoided, these people are being actively sought out, which I would think would be the opposite of dehumanizing. I would think this would be less dehumanizing than say, wearing a sandwich board and handing out fliers.
To abuse or exploit a homeless person is in the top percentile of evil and low. Anyone who would "kick a man while he is down" had best hope there is no afterlife. However, to hire such a person just seems like being an employer...
Am I wrong on this one?
I consider myself an ethical person, but I also realize that I have never been homeless, and as broke as I have been I have always eaten three times a day.
So today I pick up the newspaper, and on the front page I learn that at the South by Southwest festival, homeless people have been hired to carry a portable router and be human "hot spots." One man had a tshirt that read "Hello, my name is Clarence, I am a 4G hot spot." There is no set pay structure, but the company involved suggests $2 per 15 minutes of wireless access. Clarence and his colleagues keep what they earn.
This was decried as dehumanizing and cruel by some people in attendance, and a bruhaha has been raised on Twitter in its regards.
Am I just an out of touch middle-class jerk? It seems to me that while this might be kind of a crappy job, its just that, a job. These people, of whom I might add are being refered to by their names, are receiving pay (tips) in return for a service. Also, while many homeless people are avoided, these people are being actively sought out, which I would think would be the opposite of dehumanizing. I would think this would be less dehumanizing than say, wearing a sandwich board and handing out fliers.
To abuse or exploit a homeless person is in the top percentile of evil and low. Anyone who would "kick a man while he is down" had best hope there is no afterlife. However, to hire such a person just seems like being an employer...
Am I wrong on this one?