No Thanks

Last week The Enquirer reports a Cincinnati councilman is proposing enforcing income tax payments on panhandling. So I have a discussion with a co-worker regarding the seemingly implausible chance of such a tax ever being collected which transitions into an analysis of the state of panhandling in Cincinnati.

We both agree that the panhandlers in DT Cincy are relatively mild-natured compared to the aggressive ones in other cities we’ve both visited. (I provide the anecdote of being in Louisville a few years back and someone harassing me for the entire 3-block walk from the bars at 4th Street Live to my hotel.)

I then begin the story of the only time that I felt harassed by a panhandler in Cincinnati…

Me: I was walking into the Corryville Blockbuster when some large guy asked for some change. So I say “no thanks” and proceed toward the entrance, but the guy gets really pi-

Co-worker: Wait a second, you said “no thanks”?

Me: Yeah, why?

Co-worker: That was pretty rude. That’s probably why he harassed you.

This floored me. “No thanks” has been my standard response to panhandling requests for probably 10+ years. It’s honest, brief, and I thought (since half of it is simply the word “thanks”) polite. What are you supposed to say if giving money to every panhandler you encounter isn’t an option? (Let’s be honest, it really isn’t an option in DT Cincy…aggressive they’re not, but plentiful they are.)

My co-worker tells me the right answer is to tell them you just gave your change to the guy down the street. I’d always known that lying was a popular option but always thought “out of cash, sorry” was the lie of choice. Now, I’m not above lying to panhandlers, but this seems unnecessary when the truth is just as easy.

My co-worker says that the implied message behind “no thanks” is that I have money but am unwilling to give it up. Well, of course. But again, why is this rude?

Am I crazy? Do I have a good response, or should I start lying to panhandlers? Any guidance would be appreciated