is opposing the redistribution of wealth contradicting...

[brainhulk]

Since so many rich donate to charity?

For the record I hate the govmnt takes all my money, but sometimes u have to reflect and look at the man in the mirror

 

[cubby1223]

no

 

[wand3r3r]

There's a pretty big difference when you give a waiter a big tip, and when the restaurant adds it to the bill. Someone dictating what you do with your $ is never the same as doing what you feel comfortable doing. When you donate you are probably comfortably allocating an amount you know you can do without/someone can use more than you.

 

[Patranus]

Giving to charity is far better than paying taxes. It gives you the choice where you money goes (IE to programs your community needs not what is a pet project of some bureaucrat) and the money (generally) goes directly to the cause instead of through several levels of bureaucracy. I can also donate things.

I can donate a case of canned food that might cost $20 directly to the local food shelter and know that the food is going to work in the community.

I can also pay $20 in taxes, have 50% of that returned to the state of California, lose another 25% because of the bureaucracy, and the have the remaining $5 be put to some politicians meaningless pet project.

I think ill take charity any day of the week.

Sadly this mentality of the nanny state has taken over and many charities are shrinking or going out of business. We also have the federal government dictating what charities have to do so many of them are simply giving up.

 

[Anarchist420]

All government is one big destructive charity.

 

[Jhhnn]

Giving to charity is far better than paying taxes.

Mostly because it's a lot less money, right?

It's not like charity made much of a dent in the Great Depression, or in previous financial collapse scenarios, either.

Throw the bums a dime- you'll feel better about yourself.

It seems unlikely that we'd be able to support the military through voluntary contributions, let alone the interstate highways system, air traffic controllers, FDA, CDC, FBI & a few dozen other beneficial Fed & State agencies, but do rave on, OK?

 

[Tom]

just look at the word..

REdistribution. In other words, getting YOUR money back from people who are over-compensated by manipulation or flaws in the system.

It's going to happen, the only issue is how and when. King Tut doesn't won his own stuff anymore.

 

[Patranus]

Mostly because it's a lot less money, right?

It's not like charity made much of a dent in the Great Depression, or in previous financial collapse scenarios, either.

Throw the bums a dime- you'll feel better about yourself.

It seems unlikely that we'd be able to support the military through voluntary contributions, let alone the interstate highways system, air traffic controllers, FDA, CDC, FBI & a few dozen other beneficial Fed & State agencies, but do rave on, OK?

Better than throwing the government $1 and having a dime worth of services go to that person or services that are simply a pet project that the general public didn't ask for.

 

[cybrsage]

It's not like charity made much of a dent in the Great Depression, or in previous financial collapse scenarios, either.

Many people did not starve during the Great Depression due to charity. Their only source of food was private charity run soup kitchens. Do I need to dig up a few thousand pictures of different soup kitchens, all run by private charities as proof?

 

[Tom]

Many people did not starve during the Great Depression due to charity. Their only source of food was private charity run soup kitchens. Do I need to dig up a few thousand pictures of different soup kitchens, all run by private charities as proof?

not the pictures. Just post the financial records that all this charity is the only thing that fed people during the depression.

Was Hoover dam built with charity dollars ? Rural electrification ? price supports for farmers ? FDIC ?

 

[MotF Bane]

just look at the word..

REdistribution. In other words, getting YOUR money back from people who are over-compensated by manipulation or flaws in the system.

It's going to happen, the only issue is how and when. King Tut doesn't won his own stuff anymore.

How is it yours?

 

[cybrsage]

not the pictures. Just post the financial records that all this charity is the only thing that fed people during the depression.

Was Hoover dam built with charity dollars ? Rural electrification ? price supports for farmers ? FDIC ?

I find it fascinating you are claiming there were no privately run soup kitchens during the Great Depression. The educational system failed you. You also basic English problems...you think the word many means the same as the word all.

 

[Tom]

How is it yours?

The royal yours. The only way to get rich is to get money from somebody else. When those collective somebodies get it back, that's REdistribution.

Like I said, it will happen, it always happens.

 

[Jhhnn]

not the pictures. Just post the financial records that all this charity is the only thing that fed people during the depression.

Was Hoover dam built with charity dollars ? Rural electrification ? price supports for farmers ? FDIC ?

And, of course, private charity didn't fund the WPA or the CCC, which put millions of people back to work while "Job Creators" hoarded their cash...

 

[silverpig]

Giving to charity is far better than paying taxes. It gives you the choice where you money goes (IE to programs your community needs not what is a pet project of some bureaucrat) and the money (generally) goes directly to the cause instead of through several levels of bureaucracy. I can also donate things.

I can donate a case of canned food that might cost $20 directly to the local food shelter and know that the food is going to work in the community.

I can also pay $20 in taxes, have 50% of that returned to the state of California, lose another 25% because of the bureaucracy, and the have the remaining $5 be put to some politicians meaningless pet project.

I think ill take charity any day of the week.

Sadly this mentality of the nanny state has taken over and many charities are shrinking or going out of business. We also have the federal government dictating what charities have to do so many of them are simply giving up.

I do a lot of work with charities right now and your idea of how efficient they are is flawed. Most are not very efficient, and the ones that ARE efficient are limited in size and scope and have to fight for money from donors who are completely irrational.

Most people who donate do so because of some kind of personal connection or affiliation. They donate to their alma mater, or to the hospital where they received their cancer treatment, or because of a religious affiliation. That's the DEFINITION of pet project. God forbid anyone ask you to do research to donate to an organization that is efficient or more importantly, effective.

The overwhelmingly vast majority of charities are ineffective; even the efficient ones. You cry about how welfare perpetuates poverty, well so do homeless shelters and soup kitchens.

So much money from private donors and family foundations is earmarked for certain causes, moreso than from the government. In fact, I sat in a pitch session for social enterprises/charities and sat on the ensuing funding panel this week that featured a number of private foundations and a few government foundations. The private foundations had way more restrictions on where they would put money, and would restrict the donees on how they could spend the money. The worst candidate organization got funded by two private family foundations because they fulfilled a certain criterion. And by worst I mean they shouldn't even be in operation because they are so ineffective.

The government foundations could use some help with their vetting process (I'll be volunteering my time to help them out), but other than that, they funded along intelligently defined criteria.

 

[cybrsage]

And, of course, private charity didn't fund the WPA or the CCC, which put millions of people back to work while "Job Creators" hoarded their cash...

I find it odd that you also think there were not a vast number of private charity soup kitchens throughout the US.

Your school failed you too.

 

[cybrsage]

All charities has the potential to help someone stay in poverty. It is a sad, but true, effect of any charity or government program.

 

[Jhhnn]

I find it odd that you also think there were not a vast number of private charity soup kitchens throughout the US.

Your school failed you too.

Oh, please. I never denied the fact that such places existed, at all. I denied that they were adequate for the purposes at hand, both then and now.

 

[cybrsage]

Oh, please. I never denied the fact that such places existed, at all. I denied that they were adequate for the purposes at hand, both then and now.

Other than you just now, who claimed this? You quoted me, and I certainly did not make this claim.

I notice a trend in you, where you invent something not claimed, attack it as if it was, then claim victory...all the while saying your opponent is stupid for not agreeing with your victory. You might not notice you are doing it, so I am letting you know so you can keep an eye out for it.

 

[cybrsage]

Wow, my post quoting Jhhnn appears in the list before his post...very odd.

 

[cybrsage]

And there is another one. I think there is something wrong with the forum.

 

[Idontcare]

Wow, my post quoting Jhhnn appears in the list before his post...very odd.

Please post it in the technical forum, there is a thread for reporting bugs and glitches.

 

[Bowfinger]

not the pictures. Just post the financial records that all this charity is the only thing that fed people during the depression.

Was Hoover dam built with charity dollars ? Rural electrification ? price supports for farmers ? FDIC ?

I find it fascinating you are claiming there were no privately run soup kitchens during the Great Depression. The educational system failed you. You also basic English problems...you think the word many means the same as the word all.

The bolded above is a blatant lie. Do you ever address others' comments honestly? Do you even even understand the concept of honesty? Never mind, it's a rhetorical question. You are pathologically dishonest, one of the worst in P&N.

If the moderators really want to improve the S/N ratio here, they should crack down on willful intellectual dishonesty like that. In my opinion, it is disruptive to any attempts at productive discussion. It is pure, inflammatory noise, only a step above actually altering others' quotes. Unfortunately, I think it would be a tremendous amount of work to moderate consistently.

 

[cybrsage]

If the moderators really want to improve the S/N ratio here, they should crack down on willful intellectual dishonesty like that.

Says the man who did the same thing...

 

[cybrsage]

Please post it in the technical forum, there is a thread for reporting bugs and glitches.

Will do.