SvcDogSawyer wrote:If the government didn't make everyone pay, how many people would actually give to charity if they had the choice?
There's no way to know for sure. But based on all of the available economic indicators, as government decreases taxation and economic systems become favorable, charitable giving goes up. And the reverse is true as well. Also, I'd wager that aside from the ethical concerns with taking money by force, a voluntary, private charity system would also be more efficient (i.e. getting a larger percentage of benefits to the people that need them) than a government-run system. While government loves to hide what it is doing, charities require transparency.
and would that charity actually give money to individauls or would most of the donations go to research?
That would be up to the charities and research organizations themselves. I would argue that the end recipients deserve a larger say in how funds are allocated than is currently possible with multiple layers of government bureaucracy.
If the government didn't make everyone pay, how many people would donate to a welfare type org thinking that a lot of people abuse it now?
Again, there's no way to know for sure. But the indicators are favorable towards a charitable system, and at least the choice to give would be made freely.
What happens to the people that really need it and aren't abusing the system? Sure, you say they can just get a job, what about those of us that can't work? If there weren't gov. assist. programs, I, like most people getting assistance, would be spending most of my time wondering if enough people had donated to the group that helps me, did people buy a house, a car, big screen tv this month, did their kid just start college, is there going to be enough for them to help me buy food this month.
I understand what you are saying. Like I said before, even with a crushing tax system currently in place and some of the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression, charitable giving was over $300 billion in 2008, mostly from individual donors. I have faith that human beings will take care of each other without government forcing them to do it. I believe that they should be free to decide for themselves, and that if allowed, they will be much more generous than they currently are.
If welfare were to be cut, they better use all that money to build more jails. Yes, the ones that abuse welfare would finally have to get off their asses and go to work and stop having kids to get more money. But the ones that really needed welfare would probably end up in jail or in the a card board box. I'm sure a lot of those people would commit a crime just so they could go to prison for food and shelter.
As entitlement programs are gradually eliminated, the able-bodied will have a choice to make as to how they will continue to fund their lives. Quite honestly, there is a LOT of work out there. But I know far too many people who will have another child to obtain more benefits instead of using birth control and getting a job as a janitor. That garbage has to stop. Those who cannot work should be the very first people eligible for assistance. Those who can work should not be coddled.
How do you decide which gov programs to cut? How do you decide which group of people to screw over?
No one has to be screwed over. I'm arguing that under the current system, everyone
is getting screwed in some way, for the following reasons (and there are lots of others). First, people are not free to donate to what entities that they wish to. Their income is taken and they have little to no say in how it is handed out. Frequently it is mishandled and wasted, and this is covered up. If they try to opt out and not pay, they are imprisoned. That's not freedom. Second, charities are directly competing
with governments for funding ,and their competition can and will use force to collect. The economics of this are obviously not good for charities. Third, the overall system of seizure and redistribution actually discourages
charitable giving by absorbing funds and creating an air of cynicism in which taxpayers assume that everyone recieving benefits is cheating the system.
I have every reason to believe that people are garbage. But I don't. I believe that people are good and kind and will take care of each other, even if they aren't forced to.
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge