By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 18 June 2012
Edit Thread
richardhutnik said:
Kasz216 said:

There needs to be an increase in charitable giving even if you don't get rid of government spending in my opinion.

I wonder if you would see it though.

In general it seems to be shown that when people think welfare is primarily the roll of the government they're more likely to be content not giving to charity and saying "Oh well the government has failed those people not me."

Surely you'd see an increase from the other side of some sort... I wonder if it would be enough. Charity is a LOT more efficient so there is a chance but...  I imagine there would still be gaps in the system based on area.

I personally am suspect that giving will magically increase to offset spending cuts, if there isn't a demonstration now, with where people are, that they are interested in giving more.  People would be just as inclined to spend the money on themselves, if they get tax cuts (general) if the money would go to help the poor more, or not, offsetting the loss of government spending.  One thing charities do have a concern about, is if you mess around with the inheritance tax, causing there to be none, they there will be a lost of an incentive to have people set up trusts where the charity gets money.  Flat out cutting on that end could have a very bad effect.  So, the end result would be a discouraging of people to do charitable giving with their inheritance.

Maybe some other factors can be looked at to show that, if you shrink government, the citizens would pick up the slack.  Or, if this doesn't happen, that the poor and people on welfare should really not get any help at all.  In other words, arguments made in something like this video:

I'd say that's really just if your a pessmist who believe more liberal people don't really care about the poor.

It's not something I particularly believe.

People who are more against welfare are more likely to donate more money.  I would say because they believe government welfare is inefficent or wholey useless.

Therefore they pickup there own spending to "fill in the gap."

I'd think with a removal of welfare spending.  Liberals would take that tax money, or at least SOME of  it and "fill in" that gap they beleive was lost by said repeals... as would conservatives who believe welfare helps, but isn't a COMPLETE waste.

 

I think that's what explains the "gap" that seems to be found in charitable giving that others have characterized as the "Support for more charity legislation" being equated to actual charity giving.

I don't think it's the support, so much as an evaluation on how much said efforts are already helping.

 

Afterall... if you take two people who are exactly the same, except one thinks his goverment is doing ok at feeding the poor but could do better... you'd be giving less then the guy who thinks the goverment is wasting 90% of that money through government bueracracy and not doing much good at all....

correct?