3 ms·

No, you're making assumptions. You're willing to pay more to solve a problem. Do it. No realy. Do it. The amount you're willing pay, pay that. It's that simple

• komali2 9y ago
  Let's say they would be willing to pay an increased tax of 5% on their income to help homeless people. You're saying - "instead just give 5,000 dollars to a homeless person, done!" I think the absurdity of the suggestion is apparent but just in case - there's the obvious issues of 1. Assuming OP is a software engineer with no knowledge of "the homeless plight" or the best economic mechanisms to drag someone out of homelessness, there's no way they could give the money away in a way that actually defeats the problem withouts significant research effort. 2. Donating to charity is a possibility, but is not as effective as "everyone paying 5% extra tax," which leads me to... 3. Rather than paying an extra 5% tax, the OP's most effective course of action would be to lobby the government and his/her local population to make efforts to pass legislation that enables the government to levy a tax on everyone, and then use that money to solve the homelessness problem. So, just like the OP said, economies of scale, effectiveness. I am mildly upset that everyone is somewhat attacking someone for wanting the right thing to happen but not just making it happen on their own. How absurd!