To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 1863
1862  |  1864
Subject: 
Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 27 Aug 1999 12:48:08 GMT
Reply-To: 
lpieniazek@novera#SayNoToSpam#.com
Viewed: 
2240 times
  
<FH388n.5F4@lugnet.com> <37C5D07F.B4AB98C3@voyager.net> <FH3z48.893@lugnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Simon Robinson wrote:

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:

If you say that people don't give enough to private charity, consider
whether they would give more, or less, than they do now if they paid
less in taxes to fund things involuntarily.

I say people are good and they would give more if they had more.

That's not sufficient. For your point to be valid, people would not only
have to give more, but would have to give at least as much more
as charities get from taxes.

Er, technically, no. They would merely have to give enough more that the
same worthy works were accomplished. Since private charities competing
for aid are more efficient, that can be a substantially different
number.

Suppose you wanted to help a disaster victim. Spending 4 dollars in
taxes through the FEMA will get that victim 1 dollar in aid. (FEMA has a
huge bureaucracy, and a lot of the "aid" actually is pork that goes to
non victims, so it's about 25 cents on the dollar efficent) To achieve
that same one dollar you merely need give the Red Cross 1.10 since they
are 92 cents on the dollar efficient.


Incidently one of the arguments in the UK (and I don't see why
it shouldn't be equally valid in the US) against schools relying too much
on voluntary donations from parents is that schools in wealthy areas
get much more that way than schools from poor areas (because
poor parents can't afford to give much). If it's done
through public funding then the money gets distributed more evenly.

Bzzt. not necessarily. Nor is that necessarily a good thing that things
be evenly distributed. Schools should not rely on donations, they should
rely on tuition.

But fundamentally, why is it not just that those who are wealthy can buy
better schooling? They have more money, after all.

--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com  http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.

NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep)
 
(...) And they both fear that the Libertarian vultures will gobble them up :') (25 years ago, 26-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

276 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR