Private charity vs. government social programs

[The Heretic]

Let's say that the country you lived in (for most of us the USA), suddenly stopped all government social programs such as welfare, etc. and reduced taxes by an appropriate amount rather than spending the tax revenue on something else.

Would you take the money you save on taxes and increase your private charitable giving by that same amount? By less? More? None at all?

Why?

 

[curious2c]

Assuming that the government could and would do such a thing (it has a history of not going backwards on tax things) I would spend more on charity...however I would also pocket some too. Something along the lines of charity begins at home?

 

[JazzManJim]

I'd certainly give more to charity. I already contribute regularly, though payroll deducitons, and I'd up that amount.

I wouldn't increase it by the same amount. I'd use the amount the government wastes in bureaucracy and corruption to help myself and those close to me.

 

[The Heretic]

Assuming that the government could and would do such a thing (it has a history of not going backwards on tax things) I would spend more on charity...however I would also pocket some too. Something along the lines of charity begins at home?

There are several considerations in this respect:

1) Private charity funding may be more efficiently spent (depending on the charity); a higher percentage of the funds may actually get to the intended recipient. I have heard that only about 30% of government social spending actually gets to the intended recipient, the rest being spent on overhead and bureaucracy. I don't know how accurate that number is, but many private charities do much better.

2) Charity is only charity if it is voluntary. I don't consider government social programs to charity since we have no real choice as to whether to fund them or not - excpet to vote, and then it is majority rule.

3) Given issue #2, I don't fell obligated to spend as much on charity as the government does on social programs. Not all government social programs are good programs - it is quite possible that sufficient funding could be provided to private charities at levels lower than what is spent on government programs.

4) An money I spend on myself goes into the economy and is a force multiplier - helping people less fortunate, albeit indirectly.

Also, my kids are struggling financially, and I would use some of that money to help them more than I already have. Charity does indeed begin at home - but it doesn't have to end there.