Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould you give to charities out of kindness or for social investment?
Results so far:
| Kindness | 86% | 6 votes | Total: 7 votes | |
| Social | 14% | 1 vote |
Kindness
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesCharities are not something we should be using to benefit ourselves, after all we are not the charities. Donating to a cause just to get a tax deduction is not why you should be doing it. You should be donating to help others who are less fortunate than you. I agree with the government for giving the incentive to donate but I disagree with people using the incentive as a reason to give. The whole reason the government has given us the tax breaks is that people don't have it in their hearts anymore to give freely.
The bible instructs us to give freely. Luke chapter six verse thirty four states' if you only give for what you hope to get out of it, do you think that's charity? The stingiest of pawnbrokers does that". It goes on to say in verse thirty five "I tell you, love your enemies. Help and give without expecting a return. If we do not give freely then we are taking the charity out of it altogether. Expecting something in return is the wrong motivation for giving and cancels out the gift.
I guess the best way to see peoples real character would be to take away all of the incentive of tax breaks. Then we have opened a new can of worms. Are we really helping the needy by punishing the greedy? Shouldn't we leave it up to God to judge whether or not a man is giving something away for good or bad? Yes. It is not our place to judge others. In a way the government is offering us a charity by giving us a tax break. Who couldn't use a few extra bucks at the beginning of a new year.
Whether or not something is a charity all depends on how you look at it. The government helps us when we help others. If you are giving for the sake of giving then let the government give back to you. You are right in your heart and that is all that matters. Charities will always be around. There will always be those who are in need. Are you willing to answer that call no matter what? That is what true charity is, giving. We should be givers not takers. The plain and simple truth of it all is that we are not, at least most of us. But don't worry about who is giving and who isn't. Give, give freely in love.
Learn more about this author, Bob Zimmerman.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Social
One should give to charities for social investment, not out of kindness. Now I am not saying that we should all be mean to one another or that kindness is a bad thing, but its just not practical to pump resources into areas where they will serve no purpose to society. The unemployed and homeless serve no purpose to society by staying that way, and by giving to charities one hopes this would give them a chance to gain employment or housing rather than to sustain the existence of useless individuals who can serve no purpose to society.
This may sound harsh, but our universe is harsh, and unless we find ourselves in a boom time of financial growth it is fiscally unwise to invest where no profit can be made. Charities exist for a variety of reasons, some are more socially useful than others. Some exist purely out of kindness and the pursuit of fairness and whilst this is commendable these charities are usually small in operation and are only kept running by donations to them, as such charities require charity.
There are some charities however, the larger and more well known and prominent ones such as say the Salvation Army or Saint Vincent De Paul, that are more successful, but this is largely due to their being well known, and due to the various fund-raising systems employed, and so forth. However what all charities have in common is that they are not for profit, unlike a business, which might make a contribution like a charity, but has to run at a profit.
Thus a charity can be seen like a peasant helping his fellows to a better life, whereas a company making a social contribution is like a benevolent wealthy person giving alms to the poor. But both are serving the same purpose in making this contribution. They are trying to help a portion of society that is disadvantaged.
Does this help society on the whole? In many instances it does, and certainly it is possible for a charity to be operating for both the reasons of kindness and social investment at once, but if you had to choose which to invest it, social investment is the one which pays off, and also is the kinder, as it allows the disadvantaged individuals more chance of their own success. Social investment in these people is an act of kindness, and thus the two motives are not exactly that far from one another where these things are regarded.
Thus charities may be thought of as operating for both purposes, but if I had to choose a reason I would say social investment as it is the more practical in several situations one can think of.
Learn more about this author, Mark Waybill.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Economic Values
- Does globalization undermine good business practices?
- Minimum wage: Is it fair?
- Does money really bring happiness?
- Should the words 'In God We Trust' be taken off the American dollar?
- Population-economic development: A growing population is our "ultimate resource"
- Is the saying 'money equals power' true or false?
