Saturday, March 20, 2010

Charity?

I've been struggling to figure out where to go next after my last post, hence it has been over a week since I've posted anything. I'm reading the book that I mentioned in the last post, "Human Action: A Treatise on Economics" and although I find the concepts very interesting it is really dry and written in the early 1900's therefore I do not understand everything. Furthermore, I am on about page 105 of 800 something. So....I am going to take a break from how our actions are calculated to make us happy and talk about something that perplexes me. Charity.

Ok, so it doesn't really perplex me but I think that some people (I mean people who make laws, etc.) really get confused about what charity truly is. Charity is benevolence, or an act based upon a belief in the goodness and worth of other people. In other words doing something for someone because you think he is a human being and should deserve it (even if he hasn't done anything to deserve it), and it is good to give and to help others in need, right? But what if you were forced to help other people? First of all, that negates the true meaning of charity because the action of goodwill has to be a result of an internal belief, not an external force. This is why I disagree with social programs that receive funding from the government. For example, in working at a community center I recently had the opportunity to see the "Fishes and Loaves/Meals on Wheels" program in action. This senior citizen serving non-profit organization's motto is "no senior will go hungry." I completely agree that seniors should not go to bed hungry, but I disagree with the federal government taking responsibility for them all. Why? Because of their source of funding! Government grants that fund 1/3 of the Meals on Wheels program (as published on their website www.moaa.org) and large portions of the vast majority of non-profit organizations comes from taxes, paid by you and me of course. In my mind that means money I am forced to pay (because I will go to jail, etc if I don't pay taxes) goes to feed needy seniors, the homeless, the diseased or others. That means I don't have a choice about serving someone, there is no internal belief or desire to serve this particular person that is receiving a meal at this moment, to give shelter to a particular family, to help find a cure for a particular disease or to help with any other cause because I have no say in exactly where my tax money goes. I am forced to be "charitable" to a cause that I may or may not have empathy for. My right to choose who I serve is essentially taken away from me.

I'm not saying the whole Meals on Wheels program is bad, after all there are only 3 paid employees for the entire city they serve and the rest of the work is done by volunteers, plus the vast majority of the funds come through donations and small fees. It's just the 1/3 that really irks me. By depending so heavily on government funds the responsibility and accountability for our seniors is shifted from the family and local communities of individual seniors to a big government disconnected with the individuals and with those who should be taking care of them. It gives us an easy way out of fulfilling our duty as human beings to personally care for those in need around us.

Therefore what? I am responsible and you are responsible for taking care of the individuals who are in need around us or for the causes that we have empathy for. By allowing the government to take our taxes and make the decision for us of where that money goes we shirk our responsibility. I believe that the proper way to care for those needs would be social programs that are run by non-government organizations (private businesses, non-profits without government grants, etc), or in other words, leave it in the hands of the public. "But could that really work?" a skeptical friend recently asked me, "don't we need those programs?" I agree that it would be extremely difficult to make it work, but we as a people have the goodness within us to take care of those in need if we choose to. If we were not required to pay a large amount of taxes we would have the extra money needed to donate to causes or personally help individuals around us. So where do we start? I think it has to start with electing government officials who would back away from big government and return responsibility and accountability to those who rightfully own it; to me and to you.

2 comments:

Sally said...

I agree and dissagree with you in some ways. I would love to expound, but I've got strep throat again and it's taking all the energy I have just to read. An interesting topic though.

Keith said...

That is how it probably should work.