3 ms·
Because if I'm able to make myself sufficiently wealthy, I should be trusted to handle my money myself, not have it redistributed by some third party that doesn
by maccio92 8y ago
Because if I'm able to make myself sufficiently wealthy, I should be trusted to handle my money myself, not have it redistributed by some third party that doesn't always operate very efficiently.
- tashoecraft 8y agoThis isn't about trust, no one cares whether a rich person can handle their money. That's not why they pay taxes or that those who aren't super rich pay taxes because they can't be trusted. It's about funding the society that helped enable you to become wealthy. That instead of relying on the christian idea of charity that we instead fund a society that can create a more stable environment.
- tracker1 8y agoAnd what's so wrong from wanting to support charities that pay for the things you want and care about vs. more money to the militarization of police, or the military industrial complex in general?
- goalieca 8y agoCharities are only needed because the government doesn’t provide the necessary services in those areas. The unfortunate thing with charities is that it’s a whim of the donors what gets covered (1 dollar = 1 vote) and sometimes they are religious (not all inclusive)
- tracker1 8y agoI'm not a socialist and am in favor of maximizing personal liberty. Likewise I'm against corporate protectionisms and in favor of reigning in IP law. I don't want more government as a general rule.
- InitialLastName 8y agoI trust you to handle your money to benefit yourself. I don't trust you to handle your money to the appropriate benefit of society and (by extension) your descendants. Especially if you manage to do enough damage to society through your greed that it necessitates a class war. We can either redistribute peacefully in an attempt to solve problems that largely affect the poor, or we can push them off until the poor get desperate.