This is the correct answer. I’m sure Repubs are somewhat willing to contribute to improving a group as long as they personally benefit from every contribution.
That is the unironic basis of my “enlightened centrists” friends beliefs. He doesn’t want the poor people he sees on TV and at the bus stop to benefit from his money. Nevermind that he received a free education and has all the benefits of living in a first world country. Only if he himselfs would benefit from a measure (e.g. fixing the streets in front of his house) would he be in favour of spending tax money.
They get a huge tax write-off but they are still giving up at least the same money aren’t they? The issue is rather that these foundations may benefit them in another way, for example by providing a salary to their family and friends, if I understand that correctly.
Exactly. A portion of the money is funnelled back to them. Social events for networking become tax write offs when they add a “Help the kids” box out front.
I’m not so sure considering the bizarre reality that many people on welfare also think people who take government aid are lazy and we should abolish welfare
Those folks live amongst the rest of the poor undesirables silly. They don’t live in the privileged communities that would turn on them as the next ‘Them’.
Sure, but this time they can be sure their money goes to themselves instead of those pesky vulnerable sections of society.
This is the correct answer. I’m sure Repubs are somewhat willing to contribute to improving a group as long as they personally benefit from every contribution.
That is the unironic basis of my “enlightened centrists” friends beliefs. He doesn’t want the poor people he sees on TV and at the bus stop to benefit from his money. Nevermind that he received a free education and has all the benefits of living in a first world country. Only if he himselfs would benefit from a measure (e.g. fixing the streets in front of his house) would he be in favour of spending tax money.
That’s the whole idea behind “philanthropic foundations.” Rich people benefit from “charity” by getting huge tax write-offs.
And then the government decides that society can depend on those charities rather than any sort of social safety net.
They get a huge tax write-off but they are still giving up at least the same money aren’t they? The issue is rather that these foundations may benefit them in another way, for example by providing a salary to their family and friends, if I understand that correctly.
Exactly. A portion of the money is funnelled back to them. Social events for networking become tax write offs when they add a “Help the kids” box out front.
Not necessarily. There are a lot of scams involving charity. Here’s a small, ad-hoc made-up example to illustrate:
Is it really possible to write off based on estimated art value rather than initial price?
I’m not so sure considering the bizarre reality that many people on welfare also think people who take government aid are lazy and we should abolish welfare
Those folks live amongst the rest of the poor undesirables silly. They don’t live in the privileged communities that would turn on them as the next ‘Them’.
Or bank bailouts