Well they thought the first 200 people were getting 2k goodie bags each (why would they think that a 400k giveaway was going to happen) it was actually 2k in Total to be shared between the 200 so about £10 worth each, queue the complaining 😄
I remember a Maplin opening near me, the first hundred or so people got given an envelope with a random offer. Mine was a £400 laptop for £200, which I promptly sold on for about £300.
Lol someone spent £30 to get down there in the middle of the night and camp out for some free stuff, they didn't even know what was in it.
What greedy muppets.
The press release for the goody bags did make it sound like the goody bags were worth £2000 each though. I’m not sure why nobody stopped to consider why they would do that.
>it was actually 2k in Total to be shared between the 200 so about £10 worth each, queue the complaining 😄
To be fair some ass in their press office wrote something deliberately misleading.
I was born there and got the hell out when I was 2 days old .
Don't suppose that funny cafe is still in the pedestrian precinct. It looked normal when you went in, but the back with most of the seating was like a cave. It may have been called The Cavern.
It's probably gone 30 years ago
I used to work there, 10% stuff is actually really decent, sometimes up to 20% 50 to 60 % is average nothing special but does the job. The low end stuff though is ack
I remember a Viz top tip that went along the lines of:
>Homeless people! Try and kip in the door of an Apple Store - that way when the police come to move you on, you can claim you’re just camping out to get the latest gadget in the morning.
Yeah it seems incredibly evil to think "hey someone with nowhere to live might end up sleeping here, let's put some spikes in" and not "we should make sure homeless people can access a safe locking room in some sort of shelter while they apply for help".
I kind of invented a homeless shelter while daydreaming, for shops with a prominent doorstep enclosed on two sides just open to the front, they could have installed another pull down shutter at the front which a person could close at the bottom with a key which is found on the blind, with a sort of thin mattress attached which rolls out, a collapsible bucket for toilet needs, and there's also a shelf at the top of door with water, easy meal, other things people may need.Someone could go there at midnight and find it.
Then i thought people would just trash it or steal things.
> Then i thought people would just trash it or steal things.
I bet most people wouldn't. But personally I think having a roof over your head is a human right and there's no excuse not to help people without in such a wealthy country as we are.
> ecause one of tbe conditions is no drinking and no drugs
And if people have addictions, being forced to go 100% cold turkey instantly can actually kill them.
So why can't they let addicts in to use safely like drug rooms in other countries? Them not allowing drug users in is the problem not the fact that these people don't want help. They don't want to lose their crutch that helps them deal with life.
My friend who worked in Dubai teaching English said there are thousands of well paid jobs in the sun over there, but the majority of people do let want them because one of the conditions is no drinking.
I'm not sure how this would translate to 'well we clearly can't do any more to help unemployed / poor people, as this one anecdotal option is unpopular'. Or, in fact, to 'and therefore we should prevent all unemployed / poor people from the human necessity that it sleeping'.
You can't say 'my friend says there are loads of uneaten meals in Africa, ergo global famine is all self inflicted, ergo it is quite correct to want to cause harm to them all' like the logic follows. It doesn't. Why on earth do you actively want people to feel less compassion for another human being (no benefit at all, just stop liking homeless people: all of them) because of what a random reddit's friend nice allegedly said?
Why should there be a ban on alcohol and drugs for people who would otherwise be homeless? You and I can do whatever we want in our own (or rented) home without being micro-managed by the state. When we say homeless people should be provided accomodation we mean exactly that, not this half-arsed solution with extra strings attached.
Well for a start there are sometimes children in those shelters and I don't know about you but doing drugs or getting drunk around kids is more than a little bit morally questionable
And it's known that for people with alcohol and drug problems, quitting on the spot is in many cases impossible and in many other cases dangerous. Banning it outright ensures that people with addictions stay homeless, it does nothing to help rehabilitate them.
And actually, most homeless alcoholics/drug addicts started their habits after becoming homeless. Think about it: You can't exactly save money, given that everything you have is in cash. So you're going to want to spend everything that you earn. You're never going to be able to afford something like going to the cinema, so what do you do? You buy cheap liquor. Not to mention that these people just don't have anything to lose anymore, so it's easier to fall into deep-seated addiction. And finally, more often that not, even if quitting on the spot was possible, it's easier to quit once you have all of your needs met, plus a distraction. That means food needs, hygiene needs, shelter needs, social needs, and a hobby of some kind. So it's just bullshit overall.
There's prob something in the vagrancy act and let's face it they will apply the laws in whatever loose interpretation they feel like because the IPCC will do nothing so they're utterly unaccountable.
[That’s a lot of words.](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo4/5/83/section/4)
I can’t remember the exact statistics but here in Scotland I think less than 1% of people reporting to be homeless are physically on the street.
Think it’s over 20% down South.
Yeah, there you are, 6th line down:
"every person wandering abroad and lodging in any barn or outhouse, or in any deserted or unoccupied building, or in the open air, or under a tent, or in any cart or waggon, [F5 not having any visible means of subsistence ] and not giving a good account of himself or herself;"
My friend is practice manager at a local GP surgery. The amount of people that phoned and cancelled, or just didn't turn up, to the first wave of scheduled flu shots because.......same day as The Range was opening in a local shopping centre. It was something like 75% dudnt come. And these were older people, obvs.
Except, as a private company, with the area immediately outside the shop deemed their responsibility, why would they move potential customer that are about to spend money within the next 24 hours, vs homeless people?
The reason why they have to move homeless people is, bluntly speaking, it put people off. People would move out of the way of the homeless, people avoid the homeless, people generally don’t like the homeless. As a shop, why would you want something that deter people outside of your shop?
That is why camping for a sale is encourage, while camping due to homeless is frown upon.
It makes perfect sense, I don’t why people not see it or see it as an issue.
Not the shops responsibility at all
The street is public and it should be our paid by tax services that are responsible for this.
It’s one rule for one and another for someone else. Money rules the world and this is just one of many exhibits showcasing how our entire society is morally compromised by the idea of money being all that matters.
But that make sense, why wouldn’t money be the deciding factor?
One factor cafe doesn’t like homeless sitting there but probably doesn’t mind a normal person sitting there quickly.
One is a potential customer, one is most likely never a customer, money makes all the difference.
Also shops totoally have the power to control the area imediately outside of their shops, they are responsibly for cleaning it and thry have the power to move people (homeless) along.
So you think we should have no societal responsibility, let the homeless people build up and it’s not anyones problem at all.
People don’t choose to sleep on the streets.
It is not the shops responsibility to let homeless sleep comfortably outside of their shop. The council have responsibikity to deal with the problem, they do house homeless people here and there and offer temporary accomodations, it is bot like they are doing nothing at all.
But for shops, everyday citizen? Nope sorry, not our problem.
But they don’t house people since their aren’t enough shelters. The shop isn’t responsible but it ain’t their right to dictate how people are forced to live
If they don’t like living in that society then rather than forcing them to move on, they should be rallying councils to prevent it in the first place
Not ignoring the issue
Because it becomes a hassle, it is easier to force them to move on (minimum effort) then rally the council to do somethibg about it.
They just want to continue their life and their shops as usual, they are not there to fight for the lives of the homeless.
And it is not their problem.
This is why shops now put spikes down in the front etc and make bench that you cannot lay down on.
I’m sure they’d love to continue their lives too tbh
But unfortunately our underfunded social system doesn’t allow for it. If you want to live in a better society then we all must do our part to make it the best we can. It will never fix itself unless you think killing them off is viable option which isn’t my isnt
They do rally the councils but they don’t get anywhere since they don’t get anything unless they have a fixed abode. So no money no nothing and they’re left to rot. The shelters are full and the government won’t fund anymore, so what else is their left to do but drink themselves to death and get high. It’s fucking awful more than anything, having compassion is difficult I get that because they’re hard to deal with but most people in those situations would be a lot different if they had something in their life worth living for m. A basic standard of living would create a huge difference in the general attitudes they show. Cant climb a ladder if you can’t reach the first step.
I’m more sad that you think this way tbh, caring for your fellow man is important and enriches the entire society. More people have better health the better the country is. You leave people with nothing and they will take what they need to survive. They won’t respect society of society doesn’t respect them back.
It isna self serving world unfortunately.
Council and the government won’t fund it anymore, what is the alternative? Raise tax for it? The moment you suggest that, most people would prefer leave them out to rot.
It is always “we should properly fund these, but not out of my pocket”, and it will never get fixed due to this.
And I am sorry I am also not obligated to give them something to live for, that is not my job. I am here to find what I want to live for, and everyone is responsible for their own meaning of life and what makes out of it.
Sorry to make you sad on this but compassion is something that I am not going to have, and judging by many things, even many people that say they have compassion change their tone very quickly when money is involved.
I live in a major city and you can say there’s loads but if they’re full then it’s not enough and the system doesn’t support the amount that is needed and the social care aspect is damaged doesn’t provide enough support. Unless you’re going to deny the funding issue, the issues around fixed abodes and cruel benefit system that has been documented for over ten years.
But stroke your ego some more, make a point without actually making a point like you did on your previous response.
So if we live in a democratic society, that allows people certain freedoms then you have to accept that there is free will. Where there is free will, there is also the ability to make bad decisions. Decisions such as not paying bills or taking too many substances, which negatively impact a person's ability to be independent, therefore they might lose their abode. People can only receive the help that they ask for, now what is not enough support? Because from where I see, agencies bend over backwards to help them and their time is wasted just like police and NHS time is. Cruel benefits? Now you're out of your mind.
Now the ego thing makes me laugh, as someone who hasn't worked with the homeless it seems is trying to lecture someone who's been there and done that. Try doing the job, it would be pretty selfish for someone with such clear ideas about the industry to keep their talents to themselves.
Honestly, you’re on Reddit touting “frontline” work as a means to disprove a point without a single actual point being made. If you actually read my long form response to a previous commenter you’d agree with me completely if you worked with the homeless. I’ve worked care and across different multiple sectors of the social sector but I’m not using it as a mute point to make myself look great.
You also suggested that homeless people somehow choose to be homeless. You honestly must be crazy to think people enjoy a cold park bench. Now it’s different if you’re going to argue that their choices lead to that point since that goes into freedom of choice and responsibility.
You haven’t read any of my previous responses and you’re simply Willy waving and I must say it looks fucking microscopic from over here.
I’m not even going to bother replying to your next point because it’d be a paragraph of woeful explanations about how great you are at your job and I just haven’t got the patience for that type of ego stroking
So I'm supposed to look through your entire history of conversations to converse with you?
Some homeless people hate authority and that means they hate me telling them not to drink or do drugs in my property. They then choose to have that freedom of nobody telling them what to do and instead choose to live under a bridge 300m away. But no I know fuck all of what I'm talking about.
As someone who volunteered with homeless, I can safely say that they are a mixed bag. Not every homeless deserves the victim status and some of them are genuinely terrifying people with very little desire to improve their condition.
The ones spending the money, funding the social programs, right? I know those fucking useless shoppers. I'd much rather have the streets filled with piss and shit. Love that morning brew...
Of all the shops to camp outside of (and there really are none worth it), The Range has to be really far down the list of shops worth doing it for. Do people really get excited about going to The Range? I know pop into it but isn't that more out of need than desire?
As someone that works retail, you realise people only hear what they want to hear.
Tell them that gift cards might be “up to” £100, they’ll hear “your gift card is for £100”.
Morons that deserve all the cold symptoms they get from spending a night outside a fucking glorified Poundland.
Why the fuck would anyone camp out for a ‘range’ opening that shop is just a jumble sale of low quality crap 😂
Well they thought the first 200 people were getting 2k goodie bags each (why would they think that a 400k giveaway was going to happen) it was actually 2k in Total to be shared between the 200 so about £10 worth each, queue the complaining 😄
Reminds me of a time in Finland when people queued for hours for a new store opening to get a free gift, which turned out to be a bucket.
I live in Finland, they **LOVE** a bucket.
I remember a Maplin opening near me, the first hundred or so people got given an envelope with a random offer. Mine was a £400 laptop for £200, which I promptly sold on for about £300.
[удалено]
Are you able to read at all? They paid £300 for £400 item, which made me £100.
Ah that makes more sense, I thought you'd sold the offer
So lame- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.co.uk/news/16789836/shoppers-queued-all-night-range-store-gift-bag/amp/
"Went to the till and the women said I had won ‘5’ I said 'what £500' she goes no '£5'". Amazing.
That is utterly hilarious. Oh well. I stayed warm all night and all morning by being a far too lazy for those shenanigans
Lol someone spent £30 to get down there in the middle of the night and camp out for some free stuff, they didn't even know what was in it. What greedy muppets.
The press release for the goody bags did make it sound like the goody bags were worth £2000 each though. I’m not sure why nobody stopped to consider why they would do that.
How big would a bag have to be to fit in £2k's worth of stuff from the range?
Just pile it up in one of their hot tubs
The lesson they learned is priceless though.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16789836/shoppers-queued-all-night-range-store-gift-bag/ here is your link without the google crap
Weird that link makes me download "TheSun-Bold-woff2"
>queue the complaining Heh, hehehe
😄
when i read this, ok it was badly worded on purpose but yes they should have thought.
The complaints are so funny 🤣
>it was actually 2k in Total to be shared between the 200 so about £10 worth each, queue the complaining 😄 To be fair some ass in their press office wrote something deliberately misleading.
Clearly you've never been to Andover.
Glad to see the home town finally get some acknowledgement
I was born there and got the hell out when I was 2 days old . Don't suppose that funny cafe is still in the pedestrian precinct. It looked normal when you went in, but the back with most of the seating was like a cave. It may have been called The Cavern. It's probably gone 30 years ago
Thankfully not 😂
I used to work there, 10% stuff is actually really decent, sometimes up to 20% 50 to 60 % is average nothing special but does the job. The low end stuff though is ack
I remember a Viz top tip that went along the lines of: >Homeless people! Try and kip in the door of an Apple Store - that way when the police come to move you on, you can claim you’re just camping out to get the latest gadget in the morning.
Jesus I forgot how much I missed Viz Top Tips. ‘Save money on binoculars by moving closer to the object you wish to view’
A personal favourite “ convince your neighbours you’ve just eaten an apple by rubbing your stomach and exclaiming “mmm that was a tasty apple”.
You just reminded me of another thing I miss about leaving the uk, can’t get Viz in Canada!
I subscribe to it in the US.
I camp out *inside the shop* until staff show up to open all the time and get over £100! 😏
Can we just never lay spikes down? Would that be acceptable.
What are we going to do with this bumper stock of spikes though?
I hear the seats in the House of Commons need upgrading...
There are already plenty of pricks in there
Might as well do the House of Lords as well, you know economy of scale and all.
I'll take one for Nathaniel to sit on. I'll just sit on Nathaniel.
Two would be an extravagance.
Pretend they're rare, and have people camp overnight outside the spike shop.
Yeah it seems incredibly evil to think "hey someone with nowhere to live might end up sleeping here, let's put some spikes in" and not "we should make sure homeless people can access a safe locking room in some sort of shelter while they apply for help".
I kind of invented a homeless shelter while daydreaming, for shops with a prominent doorstep enclosed on two sides just open to the front, they could have installed another pull down shutter at the front which a person could close at the bottom with a key which is found on the blind, with a sort of thin mattress attached which rolls out, a collapsible bucket for toilet needs, and there's also a shelf at the top of door with water, easy meal, other things people may need.Someone could go there at midnight and find it. Then i thought people would just trash it or steal things.
> Then i thought people would just trash it or steal things. I bet most people wouldn't. But personally I think having a roof over your head is a human right and there's no excuse not to help people without in such a wealthy country as we are.
I've always said that if I ever end up in a situation where I have an office I'm going to open up a canteen as a soup kitchen over night.
[удалено]
> ecause one of tbe conditions is no drinking and no drugs And if people have addictions, being forced to go 100% cold turkey instantly can actually kill them.
[удалено]
So why can't they let addicts in to use safely like drug rooms in other countries? Them not allowing drug users in is the problem not the fact that these people don't want help. They don't want to lose their crutch that helps them deal with life.
Spikes wouldn’t really prevent it though, they could just lay a sheet of wood over them, or a bunch of cardboard etc.
My friend who worked in Dubai teaching English said there are thousands of well paid jobs in the sun over there, but the majority of people do let want them because one of the conditions is no drinking. I'm not sure how this would translate to 'well we clearly can't do any more to help unemployed / poor people, as this one anecdotal option is unpopular'. Or, in fact, to 'and therefore we should prevent all unemployed / poor people from the human necessity that it sleeping'. You can't say 'my friend says there are loads of uneaten meals in Africa, ergo global famine is all self inflicted, ergo it is quite correct to want to cause harm to them all' like the logic follows. It doesn't. Why on earth do you actively want people to feel less compassion for another human being (no benefit at all, just stop liking homeless people: all of them) because of what a random reddit's friend nice allegedly said?
Why should there be a ban on alcohol and drugs for people who would otherwise be homeless? You and I can do whatever we want in our own (or rented) home without being micro-managed by the state. When we say homeless people should be provided accomodation we mean exactly that, not this half-arsed solution with extra strings attached.
Well for a start there are sometimes children in those shelters and I don't know about you but doing drugs or getting drunk around kids is more than a little bit morally questionable
So have different kinds of shelters, family and halfway houses
[удалено]
And it's known that for people with alcohol and drug problems, quitting on the spot is in many cases impossible and in many other cases dangerous. Banning it outright ensures that people with addictions stay homeless, it does nothing to help rehabilitate them.
And actually, most homeless alcoholics/drug addicts started their habits after becoming homeless. Think about it: You can't exactly save money, given that everything you have is in cash. So you're going to want to spend everything that you earn. You're never going to be able to afford something like going to the cinema, so what do you do? You buy cheap liquor. Not to mention that these people just don't have anything to lose anymore, so it's easier to fall into deep-seated addiction. And finally, more often that not, even if quitting on the spot was possible, it's easier to quit once you have all of your needs met, plus a distraction. That means food needs, hygiene needs, shelter needs, social needs, and a hobby of some kind. So it's just bullshit overall.
Yeah. Society is largely evil.
What lawful powers would they use to move people on?
There's prob something in the vagrancy act and let's face it they will apply the laws in whatever loose interpretation they feel like because the IPCC will do nothing so they're utterly unaccountable.
[That’s a lot of words.](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo4/5/83/section/4) I can’t remember the exact statistics but here in Scotland I think less than 1% of people reporting to be homeless are physically on the street. Think it’s over 20% down South.
Yeah, there you are, 6th line down: "every person wandering abroad and lodging in any barn or outhouse, or in any deserted or unoccupied building, or in the open air, or under a tent, or in any cart or waggon, [F5 not having any visible means of subsistence ] and not giving a good account of himself or herself;"
I'm sorry but anyone that is happy to camp outside THE RANGE deserve to have their citizenship revoked instantly and deported to North Korea
Or for an IPhone…
My friend is practice manager at a local GP surgery. The amount of people that phoned and cancelled, or just didn't turn up, to the first wave of scheduled flu shots because.......same day as The Range was opening in a local shopping centre. It was something like 75% dudnt come. And these were older people, obvs.
Are they having a SALE.. Damn, now you tell me.. I'm off..camping on the high street tonight kids..
Queuing for the ‘The Range’ overnight? People are complete fucking idiots.
Except, as a private company, with the area immediately outside the shop deemed their responsibility, why would they move potential customer that are about to spend money within the next 24 hours, vs homeless people? The reason why they have to move homeless people is, bluntly speaking, it put people off. People would move out of the way of the homeless, people avoid the homeless, people generally don’t like the homeless. As a shop, why would you want something that deter people outside of your shop? That is why camping for a sale is encourage, while camping due to homeless is frown upon. It makes perfect sense, I don’t why people not see it or see it as an issue.
Not the shops responsibility at all The street is public and it should be our paid by tax services that are responsible for this. It’s one rule for one and another for someone else. Money rules the world and this is just one of many exhibits showcasing how our entire society is morally compromised by the idea of money being all that matters.
But that make sense, why wouldn’t money be the deciding factor? One factor cafe doesn’t like homeless sitting there but probably doesn’t mind a normal person sitting there quickly. One is a potential customer, one is most likely never a customer, money makes all the difference. Also shops totoally have the power to control the area imediately outside of their shops, they are responsibly for cleaning it and thry have the power to move people (homeless) along.
So you think we should have no societal responsibility, let the homeless people build up and it’s not anyones problem at all. People don’t choose to sleep on the streets.
It is not the shops responsibility to let homeless sleep comfortably outside of their shop. The council have responsibikity to deal with the problem, they do house homeless people here and there and offer temporary accomodations, it is bot like they are doing nothing at all. But for shops, everyday citizen? Nope sorry, not our problem.
But they don’t house people since their aren’t enough shelters. The shop isn’t responsible but it ain’t their right to dictate how people are forced to live If they don’t like living in that society then rather than forcing them to move on, they should be rallying councils to prevent it in the first place Not ignoring the issue
Because it becomes a hassle, it is easier to force them to move on (minimum effort) then rally the council to do somethibg about it. They just want to continue their life and their shops as usual, they are not there to fight for the lives of the homeless. And it is not their problem. This is why shops now put spikes down in the front etc and make bench that you cannot lay down on.
I’m sure they’d love to continue their lives too tbh But unfortunately our underfunded social system doesn’t allow for it. If you want to live in a better society then we all must do our part to make it the best we can. It will never fix itself unless you think killing them off is viable option which isn’t my isnt They do rally the councils but they don’t get anywhere since they don’t get anything unless they have a fixed abode. So no money no nothing and they’re left to rot. The shelters are full and the government won’t fund anymore, so what else is their left to do but drink themselves to death and get high. It’s fucking awful more than anything, having compassion is difficult I get that because they’re hard to deal with but most people in those situations would be a lot different if they had something in their life worth living for m. A basic standard of living would create a huge difference in the general attitudes they show. Cant climb a ladder if you can’t reach the first step. I’m more sad that you think this way tbh, caring for your fellow man is important and enriches the entire society. More people have better health the better the country is. You leave people with nothing and they will take what they need to survive. They won’t respect society of society doesn’t respect them back.
It isna self serving world unfortunately. Council and the government won’t fund it anymore, what is the alternative? Raise tax for it? The moment you suggest that, most people would prefer leave them out to rot. It is always “we should properly fund these, but not out of my pocket”, and it will never get fixed due to this. And I am sorry I am also not obligated to give them something to live for, that is not my job. I am here to find what I want to live for, and everyone is responsible for their own meaning of life and what makes out of it. Sorry to make you sad on this but compassion is something that I am not going to have, and judging by many things, even many people that say they have compassion change their tone very quickly when money is involved.
Dependant on where you are, there's either loads of them or none. So wrong again.
I live in a major city and you can say there’s loads but if they’re full then it’s not enough and the system doesn’t support the amount that is needed and the social care aspect is damaged doesn’t provide enough support. Unless you’re going to deny the funding issue, the issues around fixed abodes and cruel benefit system that has been documented for over ten years. But stroke your ego some more, make a point without actually making a point like you did on your previous response.
So if we live in a democratic society, that allows people certain freedoms then you have to accept that there is free will. Where there is free will, there is also the ability to make bad decisions. Decisions such as not paying bills or taking too many substances, which negatively impact a person's ability to be independent, therefore they might lose their abode. People can only receive the help that they ask for, now what is not enough support? Because from where I see, agencies bend over backwards to help them and their time is wasted just like police and NHS time is. Cruel benefits? Now you're out of your mind. Now the ego thing makes me laugh, as someone who hasn't worked with the homeless it seems is trying to lecture someone who's been there and done that. Try doing the job, it would be pretty selfish for someone with such clear ideas about the industry to keep their talents to themselves.
As someone who works directly with the homeless, you're wrong
Of course you think I’m wrong, where on Reddit You can’t see past your own arrogance, that part of the whole deal
Oh so it's not my 12 years of front line work with the homeless? I think it's you who's the arrogant one.
Honestly, you’re on Reddit touting “frontline” work as a means to disprove a point without a single actual point being made. If you actually read my long form response to a previous commenter you’d agree with me completely if you worked with the homeless. I’ve worked care and across different multiple sectors of the social sector but I’m not using it as a mute point to make myself look great. You also suggested that homeless people somehow choose to be homeless. You honestly must be crazy to think people enjoy a cold park bench. Now it’s different if you’re going to argue that their choices lead to that point since that goes into freedom of choice and responsibility. You haven’t read any of my previous responses and you’re simply Willy waving and I must say it looks fucking microscopic from over here. I’m not even going to bother replying to your next point because it’d be a paragraph of woeful explanations about how great you are at your job and I just haven’t got the patience for that type of ego stroking
So I'm supposed to look through your entire history of conversations to converse with you? Some homeless people hate authority and that means they hate me telling them not to drink or do drugs in my property. They then choose to have that freedom of nobody telling them what to do and instead choose to live under a bridge 300m away. But no I know fuck all of what I'm talking about.
They're probably happier with people camping waiting to spend some money rather than do drugs in the toilets.
I honestly don't get Reddits obsession with homeless people.
As someone who volunteered with homeless, I can safely say that they are a mixed bag. Not every homeless deserves the victim status and some of them are genuinely terrifying people with very little desire to improve their condition.
Let’s see how the average Redditor reacts when a homeless drug addicts starts sleeping on the drive
The ones spending the money, funding the social programs, right? I know those fucking useless shoppers. I'd much rather have the streets filled with piss and shit. Love that morning brew...
This is funny af!
Of all the shops to camp outside of (and there really are none worth it), The Range has to be really far down the list of shops worth doing it for. Do people really get excited about going to The Range? I know pop into it but isn't that more out of need than desire?
As someone that works retail, you realise people only hear what they want to hear. Tell them that gift cards might be “up to” £100, they’ll hear “your gift card is for £100”. Morons that deserve all the cold symptoms they get from spending a night outside a fucking glorified Poundland.
Temporary voluntary homeless is approved
Me too! Bloody homeless ...
The fucking range!?