3 ms·

> Who really dumps their money voluntarily to the taxman when your family..your friends..your neighbors needs and suffering can be alleviated with immediate res

> Who really dumps their money voluntarily to the taxman when your family..your friends..your neighbors needs and suffering can be alleviated with immediate results. The question I think you are asking is, "If you give your money to the government, you don't know where it goes. Perhaps it is wasted. If you give it to people you know need it locally, you can have immediate results. Why push for the former?" If I've understood you correctly, that's a totally valid question, and it's one I think about quite a bit. I could, for instance, really focus on helping people in my immediate area. I could buy a lot of meals for a lot of people. But ultimately, I think I can achieve more by organizing. If I can spend some money on mutual aid to help out some folks locally, and spend some on building coalitions and participating in collective action, I think I ultimately achieve more.

jelliclesfarm 6y ago
You could organize those who want to contribute voluntarily. A tax is mandatory. Example: We have a homelessness industrial complex in California. Our taxes go more towards paying activists and those who work with the homeless rather than building homes. The only way to get rid of homelessness is to build homes. It’s not like you can talk your way out of street living with talk therapy. While a portion need help..all of them need to be off of the streets. When California shows some results, I will consider supporting more taxation.
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  You and I agree here. Build homes. Use tax money to build and operate housing. (Don't do the shitty American thing where you spend on the capital budget but not the operational budget.) We also need crisis intervention, counseling, drug programs, and support.
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    There has to be three streams. Housing those who need to get a job/reskill/can’t work. Another for medical intervention. And the third is rehab for addiction issues. This would be the largest group. I want to share more re problem statement/solution strategy..but a little busy now. I hope to revisit this at some other time. I just have to find it for a quick cut and paste from where I had written earlier. Cheers.

jelliclesfarm 6y ago

You could organize those who want to contribute voluntarily. A tax is mandatory. Example: We have a homelessness industrial complex in California. Our taxes go more towards paying activists and those who work with the homeless rather than building homes. The only way to get rid of homelessness is to build homes. It’s not like you can talk your way out of street living with talk therapy. While a portion need help..all of them need to be off of the streets. When California shows some results, I will consider supporting more taxation.

Pfhreak 6y ago
You and I agree here. Build homes. Use tax money to build and operate housing. (Don't do the shitty American thing where you spend on the capital budget but not the operational budget.) We also need crisis intervention, counseling, drug programs, and support.
- jelliclesfarm 6y ago
  There has to be three streams. Housing those who need to get a job/reskill/can’t work. Another for medical intervention. And the third is rehab for addiction issues. This would be the largest group. I want to share more re problem statement/solution strategy..but a little busy now. I hope to revisit this at some other time. I just have to find it for a quick cut and paste from where I had written earlier. Cheers.