TheRealMafoo said:
CHYUII said:
I am all for helping the poor but at the same time I do not want the rich to be bullied out of their possession because if I were them I would not like it.
All things need balance.
|
Yea, like you, millions of Americans are for helping the poor. That's why we are the most charitable country in the world.
The best way to take that feeling of giving away from people, is for the government to say "this is now our job".
As for the people making the rich pay for it, it reminds me of a bumper sticker I once saw, that made me laugh. It said:
I am a Democrat, because spending other peoples money makes me feel better about myself.
I am of the philosophy that if you want to help poor people, go help them. Don't make someone else do it for you.
|
There is also a major difference between how efficiently some charities can deliver aid to individuals as compared to the government.
Recently, the local food bank did a major push for donations from people in apartment buildings because of how large the demand increase has been this year. When they did this they included a pamphlet to tell people the kinds of foods they were looking for in particular, as well as gave some statistics about the food bank. One thing that stuck out for me in particular was how they claimed that because of the partnerships they had developed with producers, a monetary donation was able to provide 4 times as much food as could be bought in a store. The reason for this efficiency is simple, the food bank is a large and well respected charity which can get food from massive companies at close to (or below) their cost, and since their workforce is primarily volunteers their overhead is tiny.
In contrast, being that companies don't get any good will from their customers for working with the government the only savings they would receive from large companies are volume discounts, and the added expense of the (typically) unionized government workforce would push the cost of providing a similar service to (at best) a similar cost to buying food from a local store. When you add to this the inefficiency of collecting tax, the cost associated with the bureaucracy of determining who should receive help, and the "loss" associated with people exploiting the system (after all, far more people would take advantage of the government than any respected charity) it potentially costs several times as much per person helped to deliver this kind of aid to people through the government than through charity.