I took offense at Peter Borcher’s Thursday column. I realize his intent was humor, but I did not find his reference to the “can man” funny. He said, “watching a can man scrounge is not merely a source of amusement — it’s an education.”

I am sure the gentleman to whom Mr. Borchers refers does not consider his behavior amusing, he most likely considers it surviving. Not everyone can afford to attend college and not have a job as Mr. Borchers professes to do.

Where you or I may see an empty can as garbage, others see an income. America’s family policies do not provide a “living wage” for the neediest of our citizens. Therefore, they do what they must in order to pay their bills, put food on the table and clothes on their backs.

Perhaps while Mr. Borchers is completing his education — in watching “can men” — he might want to invest in a class or two in compassion.

Diann C. MoormanGraduate student Human development and family studies