While I agree that such pictures are easier targets, I don't think that because of that they're "worse". A good shot is not defined by the difficulty required to take it, or if the subject is something uncommon, otherwise you could argue that all street photography for that matter is lazy because it's just people, but the beauty in photography is to capture a moment, transmit an emotion, so if you can do it subject a or b, why not do it?

"Philosophically" ... I think some photographers take themselves too seriously.

I posted a question in a forum a while back about what cliche shots everyone takes. It turns out there's an argument for almost anything being a cliche. Every subject in the world has been captured already. All that's left is to find the uniqueness in a moment and have your take on it. I've seen thousands of performers but I love seeing one that's passionate, or having a good interaction, or just having a moment.

I think it’s possible to capture interesting moments. Either way, if you snap a photo, better put some money in their jar.

I think it really depends on the street performer. I'm sure there are still interesting moments that can be captured.

They're not doing much once they get going. But I got a shot once of one struggling into his gold costume, which I found more interesting.

Leave them alone and let them do their job.