The Free Talk Live BBS
Free Talk Live => The Polling Pit => Topic started by: AbsurdParadox on June 20, 2007, 03:55:06 AM
-
Really think about it. Lets say you make a $1000 paycheck... after taxes, $700. All of a sudden, you get your $300 back. You think you might give $5 a month to a local bum-helpin' charity? Maybe even $20?
-
Why the fuck would I help a bum?
Why can't the dude work?
I can hire him....but give him money....fuck that....and fuck you!
-
Fuck I'm sick of the moronic trolls around here.
-
Do you know what a bum is, asshole?
oh, and to answer your question.....$0.00
-
I am well acquainted with your mother.
-
whever
-
whever
I accept your admittance of defeat. Fair played.
-
whever.
-
whever.
Double kill!!!
-
whever.
-
P.S. Whever = you are a stupid asshole that doesn't know anything.
-
I'd pay according to net income. If I make $2000 a month and my necessary expenses (rent, bills, basic food, etc) are $1800 a month, I'd calculate a tithe at $20, not $200. If my expenses were $1000, I'd give $100.
The "Deserving Poor" test: Offer them $20 to wash your car. If they refuse, they don't deserve the money.
-
This is too complex an issue. Every answer should be "It depends..."
I'll tell you that now I spend the majority of my time (that I could be earning lots of money) taking care of autistic children and that if I had more money it would most-likely go to helping families of autistic children or to research into autism.
Other people would have more desire to give money to battered women and their children. And others would be likely to give to war veterans. And others would be likely to give to the elderly infirmed.
I doubt you would see many generalized welfare charities. People need help for different reasons and different charities will be specialized in who and how they help.
-
Private charities would screen out parasites. Government has incentive to include them. Most of the 30% the government steals from you is wasted. A small fraction of that would do more good in a private scenario. Seriously, giving 5% of your income would do more real good than what is taken from you now. All of the bureaucrats whose existence is supported by stolen taxes would have to go out and get a real job producing something.
-
I'd pay according to net income. If I make $2000 a month and my necessary expenses (rent, bills, basic food, etc) are $1800 a month, I'd calculate a tithe at $20, not $200. If my expenses were $1000, I'd give $100.
The "Deserving Poor" test: Offer them $20 to wash your car. If they refuse, they don't deserve the money.
Dude, I'd wash your car for $20. You'd have to be moderately well off or really fucking lazy to refuse. Try $5.
-
I'd pay according to net income. If I make $2000 a month and my necessary expenses (rent, bills, basic food, etc) are $1800 a month, I'd calculate a tithe at $20, not $200. If my expenses were $1000, I'd give $100.
The "Deserving Poor" test: Offer them $20 to wash your car. If they refuse, they don't deserve the money.
Dude, I'd wash your car for $20. You'd have to be moderately well off or really fucking lazy to refuse. Try $5.
depends on how well he wants it washed and how bad it is in the first place. are we talking cleaning out the engine and full wax? that'd take a while longer. $20 is crap price if you spend 2 hours scrubbing at the engine.
-
The Free State will not work unless there's enough charity!
Or else Michael Moore will come over and find some bum and have him tell his life story with Adagio for Strings as the soundtrack... And then we lose our freedom!
So not only would I donate large sums to charity, I would look down on anyone who didn't.
And it feels pretty good actually. You have more reasons to go to work every day other than your own fat ass.
-
The Free State will not work unless there's enough charity!
Or else Michael Moore will come over and find some bum and have him tell his life story with Adagio for Strings as the soundtrack... And then we lose our freedom!
So not only would I donate large sums to charity, I would look down on anyone who didn't.
And it feels pretty good actually. You have more reasons to go to work every day other than your own fat ass.
You can support bums as much as you want....but don't send them my way.
-
So not only would I donate large sums to charity, I would look down on anyone who didn't.
Why?
-
cus he is better than everyone else...he looks down on everyone...AKA assfuckinghole
-
Dude, I'd wash your car for $20. You'd have to be moderately well off or really fucking lazy to refuse. Try $5.
And yet many of the homeless will refuse this offer. I shit you not.
-
So not only would I donate large sums to charity, I would look down on anyone who didn't.
Why?
Because not everyone buys into the randist BS that charity is evil, because you would hope for the same in their situation, and it's not like he's saying he wants to threaten people who don't with fines or jailtime, so let him be.
-
not everyone buys into the randist BS that charity is evil
I'm not an Objectivist, but how is this answering my question of why someone would look down upon another for not caring about others?
you would hope for the same in their situation
So because he would want help, he can look down on others for not wanting help?
it's not like he's saying he wants to threaten people who don't with fines or jailtime, so let him be.
I take it as a given that people on this board do not want to force their opinions on others, but that doesn't mean they are incapable of irrationality. Small irrationalities can lead to great injustice.
-
I (or rather, my wife) already give about five percent, and I'm retired and fairly poor. I'd certainly at least double this, and would probably go higher if my income were more.
-
Most everyone would have separate issues they'd support financially. Giving booze money to bums would be rather low on my list, while sending a few bucks to the X-Prize foundation would be considerably higher.
-
You've got a funny definition of injustice if you can have injustice in absence of force and fraud.
-
I'm with Travis on this one. It depends on a lot of things.
-
I would donate extra money to myself for my own entertainment.
I'd give bums what I give them now...jackshit.
-
charities suck, they have overhead costs, I would rather give an individual any money I wished to donate...
-
They vary greatly. Find out the specifics:
Charity Navigator (http://charitynavigator.org/)
-
charities suck, they have overhead costs, I would rather give an individual any money I wished to donate...
Well, exactly, with a lot of them, you can never be completely sure that your money is going where you want it to.
-
Before I gave anything, I'd go on word of mouth, and probably call up like "I'm calling for a friend" kinda thing. If they've got a dipshit at the reception desk, I'll go no further. Ask a bunch of stupid questions, testing their patience. Very often the people who call such organizations are faced with a problem they've never experienced before, and don't know the proper questions to ask, what the organization actually does, they're just grasping at straws.
The first impression is a lasting impression. If a person who actually needs that help can't get it with legitimate needs, they can kiss my ass.
As far as bums go, I'll give 'em five bucks if they've got a kid hanging around with 'em. I know what a sandwich costs.
-
I should mention that me calling welfare-style charities "bum-helpin' " wasn't meant to be taken literally as helping bums, heh. Seems to be some confusion about that.
-
I'd probably give 10% or 15% of my income to finance my own non-profit private schools that provide education to the public. Probably another 5% to any word of mouth kind of organization I hear about that I might be really interested in helping out.
-
So not only would I donate large sums to charity, I would look down on anyone who didn't.
Why?
Because not everyone buys into the randist BS that charity is evil, because you would hope for the same in their situation, and it's not like he's saying he wants to threaten people who don't with fines or jailtime, so let him be.
OK, let me rephrase that. Instead of saying I'd "look down" on wealthy people not contributing to local charities, I would "look up" to those that do, and in doing so contribute to creating a culture of social responsibility, where voluntary generosity brings one recognition and respect. Everything being relative, that might be equivalent to "looking down" on those that don't, but it doesn't sound as "assfuckinghole"-like.
Related thread: A call for Charity in the Free State (http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=10766.0).
Related article, from AP via CNN.com -- Americans set new mark for giving (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/06/25/charitable.giving.ap/) --
POSTED: 2:24 a.m. EDT, June 25, 2007
STORY HIGHLIGHTS:
- Americans gave twice as much as next most charitable country
- Individuals gave a combined 83.4 percent of the total, with bequests counted
- Biggest chunk of donations went to religious organizations, followed by education
- Report: About 65 percent of households with incomes less than $100,000 gave
NEW YORK (AP) -- Americans gave nearly $300 billion to charitable causes last year, setting a new record and besting the 2005 total that had been boosted by a surge in aid to victims of hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma -- and the Asian tsunami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanitarian_response_to_the_2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake).
Donors contributed an estimated $295.02 billion in 2006, a 1 percent increase when adjusted for inflation, up from $283.05 billion in 2005. Excluding donations for disaster relief, the total rose 3.2 percent, inflation-adjusted, according to an annual report released Monday by the Giving USA Foundation at Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy.
Giving historically tracks the health of the overall economy, with the rise amounting to about one-third the rise in the stock market, according to Giving USA. Last year was right on target, with a 3.2 percent rise, as stocks rose more than 10 percent on an inflation-adjusted basis.
"What people find especially interesting about this, and it's true year after year, that such a high percentage comes from individual donors," Giving USA Chairman Richard Jolly said.
Individuals gave a combined 75.6 percent of the total. With bequests, that rises to 83.4 percent.
The biggest chunk of the donations, $96.82 billion or 32.8 percent, went to religious organizations. The second largest slice, $40.98 billion or 13.9 percent, went to education, including gifts to colleges, universities and libraries.
About 65 percent of households with incomes less than $100,000 give to charity, the report showed.
Part of 'American culture'
"It tells you something about American culture that is unlike any other country," said Claire Gaudiani, a professor at NYU's Heyman Center for Philanthropy and author of "The Greater Good: How Philanthropy Drives the American Economy and Can Save Capitalism." Gaudiani said the willingness of Americans to give cuts across income levels, and their investments go to developing ideas, inventions and people to the benefit of the overall economy.
Gaudiani said Americans give twice as much as the next most charitable country, according to a November 2006 comparison done by the Charities Aid Foundation. In philanthropic giving as a percentage of gross domestic product, the U.S. ranked first at 1.7 percent. No. 2 Britain gave 0.73 percent, while France, with a 0.14 percent rate, trailed such countries as South Africa, Singapore, Turkey and Germany.
Mega-gifts, which Giving USA considers to be donations of $1 billion or more, tend to get the most attention, and that was true last year especially.
Investment superstar Warren Buffett announced in June 2006 that he would give $30 billion over 20 years to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Of that total, $1.9 billion was given in 2006, which helped push the year's total higher.
Gaudiani said that gift reflects a growing focus on using donated money efficiently and effectively.
"I think it's also a strategic commitment to upward mobility exported to other countries, in the form of improved health and stronger civil societies," she said.
The Gates Foundation has focused on reducing hunger and fighting disease in developing countries as well as improving education in the U.S. Without Buffett's pledge, it had an endowment of $29.2 billion as of the end of 2005.
Meanwhile, companies and their foundations gave less in 2006, dropping 10.5 percent to $12.72 billion. Jolly said corporate giving fell because companies had been so generous in response to the natural disasters and because profits overall were less strong in 2006 over the year before.
The Giving USA report counts money given to foundations as well as grants the foundations make to nonprofits and other groups, since foundations typically give out only income earned without spending the original donations.
-
Just listened to Friday's show, and a caller called in about Charity in a free market. Thought I would bump this poll :)
-
I wouldn't donate as a percentage of total income, but a percentage of income minus rent, utilities, etc. What that percentage would be would depend on my income. If I make $40,000 a year, it could be 5%, but if I make $4 million a year, it could be well over 50%. It also depends on the charities available, how much I trust them not to embezzle my money, and how effective they are at raising people out of poverty.
-
It doesn't matter now, really. I've been taxed so much that at this point, if taxes were abolished, I'd expect charity to be extended to me from the paychecks of IRS employees.
-
I wouldn't give a god damn thing. That's probably because I need all the money I can get right now to better my own life - rather than bettering someone elses.
Maybe in my 40's or 50's when my life is set I'd donate 2 or 3 percent.
-
I'd donate about a third of my income plus old furniture and clothes and stuff, but it won't be exactly "welfare-style". Habitat for Humanity, local food banks, and local charity hospitals are always good. On a less local scale, educational programs like One Laptop Per Child and "open" educational content providers. And I'd contribute to a local make-work program that hires the unemployed to keep the city clean - stuff like that.
-
I'd volunteer at Single Moms United.
-
I'd volunteer at Single Moms United.
local strip club?
-
I'd volunteer at Single Moms United.
local strip club?
Local support group. I guess it's not really charity...but I'd like to be there for the single moms struggling to get by.
-
Absolutely nothing.
-
Ever since i was a young bleeding heart liberal i had always wanted to start up a charity for the homeless. I think if i could have my 30 percent i'd nearly feel obligated to go ahead with it. No excuses for me to lean on.