CDZ Why can't all social services be financed voluntarily?

[Onyx]

I never get a satisfying answer to this question.The US has the most waste and inefficiency in its spending, but even with this being the case, most social programs could be funded voluntarily by a proportion of the population that supports them.

I'll admit that it is a little ambitious to fund everything in America voluntarily with a proportion of the population (the calculations are way better for other countries). This is because the US government spends inefficiently in every single area, with the most notable examples being defense, healthcare, and education.

Just imagine if your government didn't waste most of your money on useless 20 billion $ walls and giving welfare to bloated corporations.

 

[Toronado3800]

Ideally that would work.

Unfortunately human nature takes over and folks will not want to fund anything they don't benefit from thinking their own need is superior.

The same "defects" make pure capitalism and pure socialism not work either.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Because it is question that has no need of an answer.

But go to Emily Ngheim, and she will have an answer for you.

 

[TNHarley]

There are a lot of people who don't contribute. Would need to be MASSIVE donations.
Granted, that could light a fire under a lot of them.

 

[Onyx]

Unfortunately human nature takes over and folks will not want to fund anything they don't benefit from thinking their own need is superior

I don't believe in charity myself. I have selfish reasons for wanting a clean environment and healthy community.

 

[task0778]

Gov't run social programs are always inefficient, and we spend billions on the damndest things. One size fits all is a poor way to address social problems, in a country where some states are more populated or urban than others. IMHO we should probably block grant whatever is deemed appropriate to the states and let them distribute it according tot heir specific needs. And failure to do it effectively and efficiently would then reside with their governor and legislatures.

 

[Onyx]

Because it is question that has no need of an answer.

So you don't see a problem with forcing Americans to finance programs that go against their beliefs?

I don't believe Americans should be forced to pay 500 million a year to private organizations like planned parenthood. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 20 billion a year to finance NASA space exploration, when we have a lot of problems here on planet earth. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 50 billion on a HUD department plagued with corruption and waste. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 600 billion financing war and terror around the globe, just so fat defense companies can make an easy buck.

 

[Toronado3800]

Because it is question that has no need of an answer.

So you don't see a problem with forcing people to finance programs against their beliefs? Especially when their tax dollars go to an incompetent and corrupt government?

I don't believe Americans should be forced to pay 500 million a year to private organizations like planned parenthood. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 20 billion a year to finance NASA space exploration, when we have a lot of problems here on planet earth. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 50 billion on a HUD department plagued with corruption and waste. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 600 billion financing war and terror around the globe, just so fat defense companies can make an easy buck.

IDEALLY you are right.

Consider though, I don't care if there is a road to your house. My house yes, your house no. So I don't want to pay for your road.

 

[TNHarley]

Because it is question that has no need of an answer.

So you don't see a problem with forcing Americans to finance programs that go against their beliefs?

I don't believe Americans should be forced to pay 500 million a year to private organizations like planned parenthood. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 20 billion a year to finance NASA space exploration, when we have a lot of problems here on planet earth. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 50 billion on a HUD department plagued with corruption and waste. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 600 billion financing war and terror around the globe, just so fat defense companies can make an easy buck.

IKR? NASA is such a waste

 

[depotoo]

There is a first time for everything, I guess.

I never get a satisfying answer to this question.The US has the most waste and inefficiency in its spending, but even with this being the case, most social programs could be funded voluntarily by a proportion of the population that supports them.

I'll admit that it is a little ambitious to fund everything in America voluntarily with a proportion of the population (the calculations are way better for other countries). This is because the US government spends inefficiently in every single area, with the most notable examples being defense, healthcare, and education.

Just imagine if your government didn't waste most of your money on useless 20 billion $ walls and giving welfare to bloated corporations.

 

[depotoo]

He said social services in his title.

Because it is question that has no need of an answer.

So you don't see a problem with forcing people to finance programs against their beliefs? Especially when their tax dollars go to an incompetent and corrupt government?

I don't believe Americans should be forced to pay 500 million a year to private organizations like planned parenthood. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 20 billion a year to finance NASA space exploration, when we have a lot of problems here on planet earth. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 50 billion on a HUD department plagued with corruption and waste. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 600 billion financing war and terror around the globe, just so fat defense companies can make an easy buck.

IDEALLY you are right.

Consider though, I don't care if there is a road to your house. My house yes, your house no. So I don't want to pay for your road.

 

[Toronado3800]

If the road to his house isn't a social service then....

I don't care if others get treated when they show up at the hospital with a gunshot wound and can not pay. Apparently my fellow Americans do. Why should I have to pay?

 

[task0778]

There is a first time for everything, I guess.

I never get a satisfying answer to this question.The US has the most waste and inefficiency in its spending, but even with this being the case, most social programs could be funded voluntarily by a proportion of the population that supports them.

I'll admit that it is a little ambitious to fund everything in America voluntarily with a proportion of the population (the calculations are way better for other countries). This is because the US government spends inefficiently in every single area, with the most notable examples being defense, healthcare, and education.

Just imagine if your government didn't waste most of your money on useless 20 billion $ walls and giving welfare to bloated corporations.

Not to be a total dick, but Onyx didn't really ask a question.

 

[there4eyeM]

Representation in taxation equals ascent, thus, voluntary.

 

[Onyx]

Consider though, I don't care if there is a road to your house. My house yes, your house no. So I don't want to pay for your road.

Roads will be built as long as there is a need to get between two points. Roads will be maintained as long as there is a need to get between two points. Necessity alone will ensure that infrastructure is always built upon.

There are advantages to helping people outside your home community. The advantages of which can be both pragmatic and idealistic. Human beings will always be idealistic, and I for one want a better world beyond where I dwell.

 

[Onyx]

Representation in taxation equals ascent, thus, voluntary.

Ha, that's bullshit! I didn't vote for any of the politicians trying to set my tax rate and how it gets spent. They don't represent my interests, so I don't pay taxes to benefit theirs.

 

[depotoo]

Well, I took his title as being such. Should have known better. Thanks for setting me straight.

There is a first time for everything, I guess.

I never get a satisfying answer to this question.The US has the most waste and inefficiency in its spending, but even with this being the case, most social programs could be funded voluntarily by a proportion of the population that supports them.

I'll admit that it is a little ambitious to fund everything in America voluntarily with a proportion of the population (the calculations are way better for other countries). This is because the US government spends inefficiently in every single area, with the most notable examples being defense, healthcare, and education.

Just imagine if your government didn't waste most of your money on useless 20 billion $ walls and giving welfare to bloated corporations.

Not to be a total dick, but Onyx didn't really ask a question.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I never get a satisfying answer to this question.The US has the most waste and inefficiency in its spending, but even with this being the case, most social programs could be funded voluntarily by a proportion of the population that supports them.

I'll admit that it is a little ambitious to fund everything in America voluntarily with a proportion of the population (the calculations are way better for other countries). This is because the US government spends inefficiently in every single area, with the most notable examples being defense, healthcare, and education.

Just imagine if your government didn't waste most of your money on useless 20 billion $ walls and giving welfare to bloated corporations.

Even more disheartening, the gov'mint awards good Samaritans with tax credits for their charitable donations and that isn't sufficient.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Because it is question that has no need of an answer.

So you don't see a problem with forcing people to finance programs against their beliefs? Especially when their tax dollars go to an incompetent and corrupt government?

I don't believe Americans should be forced to pay 500 million a year to private organizations like planned parenthood. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 20 billion a year to finance NASA space exploration, when we have a lot of problems here on planet earth. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 50 billion on a HUD department plagued with corruption and waste. I don't believe Americans should be forced to spend 600 billion financing war and terror around the globe, just so fat defense companies can make an easy buck.

IDEALLY you are right.

Consider though, I don't care if there is a road to your house. My house yes, your house no. So I don't want to pay for your road.

Dude, I live in a place where if I don't personally clear the "road" to my house, I don't have a road. Personally, I'd prefer the gov'mint not "improve" this road because an "improved" road means that lots of assholes use that "road", tearing it apart with their four-wheelers and off-road machinery, making my access to my HOME that much more difficult.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Representation in taxation equals ascent, thus, voluntary.

Please explain how extorting a "minimal" amount of money from my paycheck is "voluntary"? Far better would be if I was required to first check off a list of gov'mint supplied services (depending on my preference), and then to write my check then-and-there.