Oh herro

[Regulus]

I'll give you that.

[DGFone]

I'll give you that.

That's exactly my point!

If you choose to do so, you can donate all the money you want to cancer research. If you give it to the government in the form of a tax, guess where it won't go? If you want to increase cancer funding, do it yourself. Don't rely in a tax to do it.

[Regulus]

If you choose to do so, you can donate all the money you want to cancer research.

But that won't happen, and that's my point. A charity can raise a lot of money, but a tax can raise a lot more than a lot of money.

And, geez, it's not like people don't waste their money anyway.

[Woeler]

That's exactly my point!

If you choose to do so, you can donate all the money you want to cancer research. If you give it to the government in the form of a tax, guess where it won't go? If you want to increase cancer funding, do it yourself. Don't rely in a tax to do it.

Dude if the government raises the taxes to fund cancer research, the will fund cancer research. It is not about whether they do it or not. It is about the two solutions 90%through charity or 100% through government. Nobody said "there is a chance the government will give it to something". That is not what this discussion is about. It is about A or B and why.

[DGFone]

^ Not even that. It will raise taxes to raise cancer research. Where will the money actually go to: First, the government will send it to a few people who will be tasked in deciding which research group that money will go to. Those people need to be paid, so you lose a lot of money there. Then, the government will watch over the money to make sure that it is used right... Except that it will involve even more government clerks getting paid, so you lose a lot of money there as well. To put it simply, if you give government money and a task to use it for, expect at most to see only half of it to be put into actual good use.

If you want to get something done, do it yourself.

[Regulus]

^ Not even that. It will raise taxes to raise cancer research. Where will the money actually go to: First, the government will send it to a few people who will be tasked in deciding which research group that money will go to. Those people need to be paid, so you lose a lot of money there. Then, the government will watch over the money to make sure that it is used right... Except that it will involve even more government clerks getting paid, so you lose a lot of money there as well. To put it simply, if you give government money and a task to use it for, expect at most to see only half of it to be put into actual good use.

If you want to get something done, do it yourself.

Have any numbers to back that up? Last time I checked, I don't have billions of dollars to give to cancer research. Only the government does.

[DGFone]

This is where you have to get responsible. Yes, you don't have millions of dollars to give to cancer research. But last time I checked, donations are tax-deductible. You pay money to a donation, you don't have to pay that amount in taxes when they are due. So what do you do? Donate that same amount as the taxes are, because through a donation, more money will go to research and not get lost in the process of redistribution. It's the same amount of money per person, but it requires more effort on the behalf of the individual.

So if you put in that extra effort, you can make the same amount of money go farther. If you are lazy, pay your taxes, and complain that there's never enough money. Or that it's going to the wrong cause.

[Azdgari]

Great thought, although,

You may deduct a maximum of up to 50% of your adjusted gross income (AGI) (Line 36 on IRS Form 1040) for the tax year the donation was given

Woeler:

Nobody said "there is a chance the government will give it to something". That is not what this discussion is about. It is about A or B and why.

Bless your heart, you're the first one to understand my question the way I meant it! Well, maybe Fip did too. =P

[DGFone]

Yes, that's because there are some government programs that you can't exactly donate to. For example, there are no NASA donations that I am aware about. The moon landings were funded by taxes, and will continue to be funded by taxes. For cases like these, yes taxes are necessary.

But it's where you do have the option to donate instead of paying taxes where, if you actually care, you go and donate instead of paying taxes for the same cause. So for cancer research, it would be better if everyone donated said amount instead of paying a cancer tax. If you need to fund schools though, then yes, you need taxes. But before you say "we need more!", I say: "Is there a way to make more with what you already get?"

[Woeler]

Fact is you don't have any numbers, you are just wildly guessing because you think you already pay too much taxes. The fact that people are not willing to get such taxes is sad, just plain sad.

Also I don't know where you get your predictions from because all of western Europe and Japan have been functioning extremely well with such laws and taxes. You will always get less money if you do it through charity.

We are one society, we should help each other. Not letting each other die because we are too selfish to miss maybe 30 dollars a month or less. Yes you need taxes to fund school. What you also need taxes for is keeping people healthy, giving people a home and be sure that your population doesn't starve.

A concept called money has overruled our morals as human beings and that is a sad and pathetic thing. It is sad that we no longer give a crap about anyone else... well we do, unless we have to pay.

And for serious, space BS is the first thing that should be cut off by taxes. These things are by far not as important as the own population of a country. The moonlanding is nothing more than a prestige object. I wonder how many people could have gotten an decent home and food to eat for that money.

Taxes for NASA and space travel pfff, we may as well throw the money in a giant bottomless pit. Oh wait, that's whats happening...

Something went horribly wrong in our moral development. Because we now much rather fund space travel than care for actual humans who need it.

it is a very, very sad thing indeed

This is not the country Lee Greenwood sang about, can't be. The concept of a people died...