Taxes and Charity?! WHAT's THE DIFFERENCE?!!!

[holtadit]

MODERATOR SPAM !!!!!!!!! 

It's good, I see more people participating actively in debates these days. MUCH better than this section was before.

I have 8 days of freedom till my exams restart. Thats why I am here - I enjoy debating.

[nid404]

MODERATOR SPAM !!!!!!!!! 

Sorry 

[Alpha]

MODERATOR SPAM !!!!!!!!! 


I have 8 days of freedom till my exams restart. Thats why I am here - I enjoy debating.

8 days is a lot.   
But still less than the difference that can be made with them.
Good to know we share the same hobby.

Nid, I really love your sig.   

[holtadit]

Sorry 

I'll let you off with a warning. 

Next time you'll be sweating it in the slammer  Jokkkkkkkkkkiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiingggggggggggg !!!!!!!!

[nid404]

I'll let you off with a warning. 

Next time you'll be sweating it in the slammer  Jokkkkkkkkkkiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiingggggggggggg !!!!!!!!

yea wtv

[$tyli$h Executive]

It's good, I see more people participating actively in debates these days. MUCH better than this section was before. 

Yes. Exactly. We missed debaters like Ari in the previous session.

Welcome Ari!

[$tyli$h Executive]

Charity is giving away what you need, not what you have to.

Need?! You mean give everything? If I don't have any money, I'll still have to give charity?!

[Alpha]

Need?! You mean give everything? If I don't have any money, I'll still have to give charity?!

Need, yes.

Charity is different from throwing away, or giving for your own benefit.

If you give away something you do not need, it's simply throwing it away, instead of into a bin, into someone's hands. That is not the essence of charity. Charity is directly linked to compassion, and sacrifice, though people use the name to hide the aims of their actions. They give with the intention of obtaining more. "Give an egg, and take back the chicken."

But that is not helping. Because charity is altruistic, selfless. If you keep giving, and take back more, you would not have made the recipient's situation better, but worse. The poor is giving then. And the rich is simply taking and taking, till the poor completely dry out.

You give what you yourself need. Then you are sacrificing. Then you feel the pain of others. And then do you give more. Your action is pure, because it's selfless. You ask not when you give. Like Kahlil Gibran says: "It is when you give of yourself that you truly give."

You need time, you give some to the poor children who lack affection and attention. You give your own pack of lunch, that's charity. You give your clothes that are dear to you, that is charity. Charity is not only money. Normally, people give away that proportion of their money which is insignificant to their real incomes. Give more, of what you really need, that is charity.

Giving is an art, as some said. Simple reasoning, because artists use their hands to speak out their heart. That is charity.

[$tyli$h Executive]

Need, yes.

Charity is different from throwing away, or giving for your own benefit.

If you give away something you do not need, it's simply throwing it away, instead of into a bin, into someone's hands. That is not the essence of charity. Charity is directly linked to compassion, and sacrifice, though people use the name to hide the aims of their actions. They give with the intention of obtaining more. "Give an egg, and take back the chicken."

But that is not helping. Because charity is altruistic, selfless. If you keep giving, and take back more, you would not have made the recipient's situation better, but worse. The poor is giving then. And the rich is simply taking and taking, till the poor completely dry out.

You give what you yourself need. Then you are sacrificing. Then you feel the pain of others. And then do you give more. Your action is pure, because it's selfless. You ask not when you give. Like Kahlil Gibran says: "It is when you give of yourself that you truly give."

You need time, you give some to the poor children who lack affection and attention. You give your own pack of lunch, that's charity. You give your clothes that are dear to you, that is charity. Charity is not only money. Normally, people give away that proportion of their money which is insignificant to their real incomes. Give more, of what you really need, that is charity.

Giving is an art, as some said. Simple reasoning, because artists use their hands to speak out their heart. That is charity.

*ahem*!

No thanks! Its difficult enough to give away something I don't need, let alone something I need!

[Alpha]

*ahem*!

No thanks! Its difficult enough to give away something I don't need, let alone something I need!

Then how come you give your time? 

[[Ash]]

Hmm... after reading all the points.. and according to my knowledge.. taxes are not equal to charity!

[$tyli$h Executive]

Then how come you give your time? 

Ah, my previous post was an overstatement! I'm not so stingy!

BUT, and a BIG but, I don't agree that you have to become a santa clause in case of Charity. Give only if you have the ability to. But according to your logic, even poor people should give charity.

[Alpha]

Ah, my previous post was an overstatement! I'm not so stingy!

BUT, and a BIG but, I don't agree that you have to become a santa clause in case of Charity. Give only if you have the ability to. But according to your logic, even poor people should give charity.

 Hehe, yeah. Interesting comment.  

And the poor need everything they have.

Then, they shouldn't go according to my logic.

Which logic then? Take and take?

[Freaked12]

Need, yes.

Charity is different from throwing away, or giving for your own benefit.

If you give away something you do not need, it's simply throwing it away, instead of into a bin, into someone's hands. That is not the essence of charity. Charity is directly linked to compassion, and sacrifice, though people use the name to hide the aims of their actions. They give with the intention of obtaining more. "Give an egg, and take back the chicken."

But that is not helping. Because charity is altruistic, selfless. If you keep giving, and take back more, you would not have made the recipient's situation better, but worse. The poor is giving then. And the rich is simply taking and taking, till the poor completely dry out.

You give what you yourself need. Then you are sacrificing. Then you feel the pain of others. And then do you give more. Your action is pure, because it's selfless. You ask not when you give. Like Kahlil Gibran says: "It is when you give of yourself that you truly give."

You need time, you give some to the poor children who lack affection and attention. You give your own pack of lunch, that's charity. You give your clothes that are dear to you, that is charity. Charity is not only money. Normally, people give away that proportion of their money which is insignificant to their real incomes. Give more, of what you really need, that is charity.

Giving is an art, as some said. Simple reasoning, because artists use their hands to speak out their heart. That is charity.

In a capitalistic society where every member gets what he deserves according to his ability ,why should that person donate.Government should provide education for all be it poor or rich but thats where the role should finish. After that it depends on the person and his ability to afford what he wants

[$tyli$h Executive]

~Alpha, I am sure, taxes = charity. Taxes are a rip off to be honest. God bless our rates are much lower than other countries. But the amount we give in taxes, is definitely used (at least, say 50% of our tax money, in case of an inefficient government) for constructing bridges, hospitals, education and etc which are necessary for poor people. Thus, we do not have to give charity if we pay taxes promptly. Not to mention the fact that usual tax rates are MUCH higher than our religion assumes to be the minimum. And considering that we and most people only give charity because their religion tells them to, taxes fulfill the purpose by some way.

And asking the question 'Does government use taxes in a proper way?' is not sensible. If I donate to a poor person, I assume no responsibility of how he spends it. He could use it to set up a small shop, or could even use it to buy heroin. Whatever it is, I bear NO responsibility for that. Thus, our religious obligation is fulfilled whenever we give charity. We need not consider whether it is spent in a proper way or not. So, if we pay taxes, we pay charity.

Alpha, it is normal that people adopt the 'give, take and take' strategy. After all, we and others give charity because religion tells us to and sometimes to show people. We are not living in a fantasy world like Santa Clause where money is unlimited, that everybody has the ability to 'give, give, and give!

And no, I'm not being cruel or something. But this is the fact.