4 ms·
A donated dollar is one less taxable dollar, so in practice provides a means for individually diverting taxes to charities one finds agreeable. In the US I've
by 0xfaded 10y ago
A donated dollar is one less taxable dollar, so in practice provides a means for individually diverting taxes to charities one finds agreeable.
In the US I've even heard people using this rational to avoid fuelling the military industrial complex. However a well functioning government that best served society would not have this problem. In principle it's the government's job to take care of society's needs, not the charities'.
I think the existence of Planned Parenthood is a case in point. Undoubtedly they provide a necessary service, but in what world should a pregnant teenager not have access to a doctor?
In practice charities act as a highly inefficient decentralised mechanism for providing basic needs to those that can't afford them. In some cases, the charities are stellar. In others, they come with a religious taint (e.g. access to a doctor through a church). In the worst case a charity can operate as a scam, see the untouchable tele-evangelists.
- jeffdavis 10y ago"In principle it's the government's job to take care of society's needs, not the charities'." I disagree strongly. Concentrating responsibility concentrates power, which is dangerous. Governments should share power internally, share between levels (federal, state, local), and leave a lot of the power with the people (who may use it for private enterprises, NGOs, etc.).
- darpa_escapee 10y agoUnfortunately, in the history of the world, charity hasn't even come close to helping as many of those in need as successful government programs. The incentives to provide enough support to different charities aren't there. Charity follows trends and whims, not needs. For example, the top cumulative donations went to charities that do not serve the needs of the poor, despite how many people are still in need of assistance despite government programs.
- rvdavis 10y ago> Charity follows trends and whims, not needs. You imply government policy does not follow trends and whims, which is observably false.
- darpa_escapee 10y agoI am not implying any such thing. What I am implying is that, unfortunately (again), government is the one entity that the common person is given a say in. They aren't a member on any boards, they don't manage philanthropists' thoughts or funds and they own no capital from which to generate their own wealth. What I am implying is that they can influence the government into addressing their needs, even if superficially.
- peacetreefrog 10y agoNot sure what this has to do with plasma apart from the word donate