sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:
sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:
Convincing politicians to give taxed money to people is not the same as giving to charity.
It's the same as promising to give to charity ONLY if everyone else does.
In my opinion it shows a concern for people not wanting to fall behind others due to their own generosity.
|
Or it could be that people see it as an obligation of society as a whole to make sure that all people attain a certain standard of living (to assure stability within society, prevent conflicts etc.), and would rather than tax money be used for that, rather than funding wars, or purchasing $ 100k golden Swiss pens for politicians to sing documents with, which misteriously disappear when said politician's term runs out (it actually happened in Romania).
|
I'm talking about the people who say "my charity work is trying to change laws."
Which tends to be a common democratic arguement.
Polticians wise, Democrats oddly give a lot less to charity.
If you want to do both? Fine.
If you just want to lobby polticians... put your money where your mouth is.
|
Well, changing laws is obviously not charity work. I had no ideea people actually said stuff like that...
|
Oh yeah. It's generally the defense that's brought up based on the surprising fact that on average two things most dictate how much you give to charity.
How conservative you are... and how religious you are.
On average an Religious Conservative is going to give way more money, donate way more time to charity, donate more blood, and everything else... then a Democratic Atheist.
The actual religion doesn't seem to matter so much as how observant you are... the more observant you are... the more you donate. This is true even when you eliminate donations to nonsecular orginizations.
On average being the important thing to mention... because there are plenty of atheists who do a lot for charity... it's just there are a lot who don't.
