4 ms·
Absolutely. If I'm honest, though, despite my ideals being that I want a significant proportion of my money to go to charity, actually forcing myself to part w
by AlisdairO 16y ago
Absolutely. If I'm honest, though, despite my ideals being that I want a significant proportion of my money to go to charity, actually forcing myself to part with it directly is a real challenge (particularly thanks to the procrastination that I, like so many people, exhibit in such situations). Personally, I find the level of abstraction provided by the government to be helpful: I'm much more able to say that I want the government to spend money in certain areas, even if it means raising my taxes, than I am able to just hand money to a cause.
I'm a much more rational spender of money I've already given to the government than I am of my own. I think the same holds for most people, to be honest.
- kiba 16y agoI'm a much more rational spender of money I've already given to the government than I am of my own. I think the same holds for most people, to be honest. Frankly, I find charity to be much more meaningful when I give it out of my free will, rather than making the government do it for me. Rather, government spending defeat the point of charity.
- AlisdairO 16y agoI don't agree that the point of charity is the warm fuzzies that I get when I give - it's a means to an end (improving the lot of others) which is more effectively accomplished,in my and many others' case, through the government handling it.
- kiba 16y agoI don't agree that the point of charity is the warm fuzzies that I get when I give - it's a means to an end (improving the lot of others) For me, the merits of charity is also about their voluntary nature in addition to the "warm fuzziness feeling". On the other hand, I suspect that our disagreement is in respect to both utilitarian merits and moral/ethical philosophy.