Jill recently attended a meeting in which local business leaders
were proud of the fact that they had successfully closed down a recycling
center on the corner of Washington and Lake Ave, a low-income area where Food for
Less is located. According to theese business leaders, this center was
attracting unsightly people who used their money to buy single cans of beer.
The presence of such people is seen as “bad for business.”
Our friend Mark is a formerly homeless man who lives in our
backhouse and occasionally brings cans to be recycled. He was outraged.
“Most of those who recycle are poor families,” he claimed. “Most people who recycle aren’t causing anyone any trouble. They’re just poor.”
“Most of those who recycle are poor families,” he claimed. “Most people who recycle aren’t causing anyone any trouble. They’re just poor.”
We had a discussion about how to document who used the recyclying
cener, and for what purpose. In Making Housing Happen (p. 222-223), Jill tells the
story of Charles Suhayda, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood, who was trained as a scientist and who trained
homeless people to conduct a scientifically valid survey to determine the needs of the homeless in
his area. Armed with data, the homeless and their advocates formed the Hollywood Community Action Network (HCAN) and successfully
lobbied the City Council to provide needed services.
Generally speaking, business leaders and middle class people don’t
like to see anyone poor or homeless in their area. This phenomenon is called NIMBYism ("Not in my backyard").
In various cities (such as La Jolla, San Francisco, Monrovia)
there has been push-back by local businesses when recycling centers open up
that are used by the poor and the homeless. But there is usually no objection
when they are run by churches for middle class folks, as this article explains.
This puts the poor into an impossible bind. The middle class
objects when the poor panhandle, but when the poor try to earn an honest living
by recycling, it’s still objectionable. Why?
When the poor recycle, they are actually performing a public
service. Some gather cans from the street, which is certainly commendable.
Others rummage through the trash. In either case, they are saving taxpayers
money since the county and city recycling centers pay people to sort out what’s
recyclable. The poor do it without charging the taxpayer a dime.
True, some of the homeless recyclers are alcoholics who use their money to buy booze. But if they weren’t earning money by recycling, they will have to panhandle or steal to feed their addiction. Isn’t recycling a preferable option?
This is an issue that churches should take seriously for biblical
as well as moral reasons.
The Old Testament makes it clear that God has ordained “gleaning”
as an obligation for the rich to give the poor (and foreigners) a chance to
gather their own food instead of begging:
“And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap
your field right up to its edge, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your
harvest. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD
your God.”
In today’s urbanized setting, recycling can be seen a form of
gleaning. It provides the poor a chance to earn needed income from the scraps
from the tables of the rich and middle class. To deny the poor that right is to
disobey one of God’s commands. It also denies the poor a chance to perform
useful work for the pubblic good.
http://twentytwowords.com/2013/04/24/homeless-chicago-man-talks-about-his-life-and-how-he-wishes-he-was-treated/
ReplyDelete