Charity isn’t needed. Only free markets and productive people.
Then you clearly know more and better than those like Bill Gates who you have already cited for his success. In truth, charity is necessary for the reasons I have mentioned, but perhaps most importantly, to alleviate the burden on the tax payer. It would be, frankly, ridiculous to assume that one can be a part of a society that lacks both tax-payer funded welfare, as well as private charitable works. It isn't realistic at all. Learn from the Tsar.
They vote socialist because they’re immoral and corrupt.
Much like children who weren't reared properly, perhaps? So then again you show the need for charity. These wayward children ought to be protected. Wealth has a consequence and expectation of benevolence in this civilized world.
Unless, you mean to say that those in a state of poverty are inherently corrupt and naturally inclined to immorality, in other words: born with those natures? Help me to understand as you do.
Charity seems to prolong to the inevitable. It doesn’t make anything better. It doesn’t pull people out of poverty. It rewards them for being useless.
It isn't enough of a reward to be considered as such. No, there are plenty of examples, all of which are anecdotal and I prefer arguing in theory. The inevitable, might I add, is death; and that is inevitable for rich and poor.
Furthermore the poor who ardently try to better themselves ought to be fostered. If they aren't fostered, I feel that society would suffer as a result. A child has potential to grow, and a pauper has the potential to expand his affluence if
privately (not by the state) subsidized by way of charity.
No they shouldn’t. They’ve already done their part. The poor should have an inmate duty to help themselves; not turn to other people for help. We’ve spent so much money to help Africa, yet they are still poor. Charity doesn’t solve the problem, it’s just a shitty band-aid.
You are asking for a tremendous burden on the taxpayer. I'm not entirely sure if this is your intention, but that is the true inevitability. For the record, I'm not talking about charity to Africa, or India, or anywhere else beside the United States. Let the rich of those countries do their bit.
If we follow this logic of yours down the proven path, we'll see crime rise and prison rates rise as a result. Crime = prison = taxpayer money. Or, we see an electorate that is so poor that when some socialist comes along, he just stole an election. Poverty, therefore socialism, therefore tax hikes, therefore tax payer burden.
You are speaking in Utopian contexts that aren't at all realistic. Charity is a necessity in any civilized society. We aren't savages. We have a country and community, we aren't our own little islands.
People who are forced to give money without anything in return is not fair or just.
Like taxes, right? I agree completely. So let's not give people the opportunity to demand higher taxes for welfare and give a little more to the relief fund, eh? Well, I will anyway. I'll enjoy my tax deduction. Cheers!