Quote from: octaft on March 11, 2014, 01:10:57 AM

Quote from: Richy_T on March 11, 2014, 01:03:03 AM

Quote from: octaft on March 11, 2014, 12:21:38 AM

Billyjoeallen has the point go right over his head. Shocker.

My question is a test to see who cares about their ideals and who is just greedy. Judging by your response, it's all about the money for you, which suggests to me your odds of willfully giving anything to charity are extremely low. If that is the case, why should I believe your ridiculous "support through voluntary charity" argument. You clearly don't.

Your question is flawed because it substitutes involuntary action with involuntary action. A question such as "how much do you think you would contribute to charity if you were untaxed" would perhaps be more illuminating (though useless for totally different reasons)

What is involuntary about it? It says "let's say you COULD," not "what if the rules changed." It's a voluntary option to get out of paying taxes, and I think it does a pretty good job of simulating what it would be like if we relied on voluntary contributions. The thing is, you all say that support will come from voluntary contributions, but when it comes time to actually, you know, contribute, all of you will be passing the buck. It's because it's not about the ideal, it's about the money, so stop bullshitting and acting like it's not. If the government charged no taxes, I assume a lot of you would care much less about getting rid of it.

It's only the statists that insist it is "all about the money" ... you know, the ones for who it really is all about the money because they've got their gaping maws shoved under the sipgot, getting their free lunch.