Comments on: Collectivism vs. Charity

By: An Interested Party

An Interested Party — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 03:10:09 +0000

It's nice to see that people like Zelsdorf and Floyd can be as batshit crazy as some on the left were when W was president...keep up the good work, fellas...

By: Floyd

Floyd — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:53:21 +0000

Truth is immutable, even in the face of the contrived fantasies of those who think themselves wiser than it.
Private charity has become a threat to the new Marxist paradigm and must be discouraged if Big Brother is to lead America into the brave new world of perpetual peace where wishes are horses and pigs have wings.

"And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!"
Rudyard Kipling-1919

By: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III

Zelsdorf Ragshaft III — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:21:12 +0000

I think those who are too stupid to know what to do with there money should join the Democratic party and donate to that entity. Those who insist they own what they earn should join the Republican party. Government of the People and for the People seems to be coming to the fore. While Government by the people seems to have been left far behind. Our represenatatives do not represent our best interests. They follow party line. And while that might not be a bad thing if both parties were equally honest. It does not take an IQ in the three digit level to see who wants to take away and who believes in personal responsiblity. The left has taken over the Democratic party. It is no longer in America's best interests to follow where they lead. They intend to tax us into submission. I will not submit.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:19:50 +0000

What does he think millions of Americans making decisions where they will put their charitable dollars is but "pooling revenue and making collective decisions about where and how it should be spent"?

Millions of Americans aren't making that decision. Instead we elect representatives who create rules that make those decisions for us.

What he really means is that you will be forced to "pool your revenue" on pain of criminal sanction for not paying your taxes and that congress and bureaucrats will be the ones to make the "collective decisions".

I'm not sure he was going quite that far, not that I really like how far he was going much better. I happen to run a charity myself, but I wouldn't want the "community" deciding on whether to give me money or not. Most of the "community" doesn't know most of the charities in their community, and they certainly won't share opinions on the worthiness of each. People who give to my charity do so because they like what I do. The better I do, the more people like it, the more donations I get. That's the way it aught to be.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 12:54:24 +0000

What does he think millions of Americans making decisions where they will put their charitable dollars is but "pooling revenue and making collective decisions about where and how it should be spent"? What he really means is that you will be forced to "pool your revenue" on pain of criminal sanction for not paying your taxes and that congress and bureaucrats will be the ones to make the "collective decisions". The more I see the face of the liberal political agenda, the more I see the face of oppression.