23
Your money to charities
What if every dollar that was supposed to go toward helping the needy, actually went to organizations whose primary function was to actually help the really needy? It has been estimated that as little as 40% of the money that goes to government welfare agencies, actually goes to the needy families. Of that, a disturbing percentage goes toward things which are not necessities. Inefficiencies and fraud on both the supply and demand side, wastes those resources that some hard-working taxpayer was forced to contribute. Private charities, on the other hand, tend to use a greater percentage of their budget actually helping their clients.I have a solution.If you could choose whether to give your tax money to the IRS or to the charity of your choice, which would you choose?
(up to the current maximum deduction)Instead of only allowing taxpayers to "deduct" the amount of money they give to charities (they don't have to pay taxes on that money), why not allow them to apply any money given to charity DIRECTLY to their tax bill?For example:If you owe the IRS $300, you go down to the local homeless shelter and donate $300. They give you a receipt (or a form) and you send that to the IRS. You now owe no more tax.
There would be a few conditions placed on the charities:
They must use at least 80% of the donations directly for the purpose of the charity.
They must be charities which mimic aspects of the current welfare system, with possible reasonable additions (food banks, homeless shelters, "pay medical bills" charities/nonprofit hospitals, medical insurance charities, alcohol/drug rehab, child care/education, etc.). But not "save the whales", or animal charities.
The charity must operate completely within the US.
This would, in many cases, keep the money in the local economy. It would also allow the taxpayer to choose to have more of his money go toward supporting those charities whose work he valued, instead of some faceless "other" needy person. It would prevent politicians from taking credit for "providing" (and buying votes with) resources they stole from a taxpayer. Additionally, it would maintain the human link between giver and receiver, fostering an environment of generosity and gratitude, instead of entitlement and resentment.