I would have less issue with giving the monies normally donated personally to charity and instead giving it to the government to disburse, if I believed that would happen. Admittedly, individuals’ track record and the government’s track record of handling finances are both stained, but the government’s is irreparably so. I don’t care if the government gives it away to whomever they deem needy, but the problem is that in most cases probably 80% or more is skimmed off the top before it gets disbursed.

And talk about motivation (or lack thereof), I trust the government even less with doing the work of charity because I think THEIR motivation is even more insidious than that of a self-righteous conservative. Many politicians I see seem to be motivated to fund charities and champion social justice because it makes THEM feel good and get the control over finances, not to mention its a strategic move to please the constituency and gain job security.

As I say this, I’ll talk outside the other side of my mouth and admit that not all politicians are like that, just like not all individuals who give charitably are self-righteous control freaks.

I guess my bottom line is, I don’t like to play the game of “guess the motivation,” especially when it comes to people doing good. And, which model gets the most aid into the most amount of needy hands? My answer would be the model of individuals with both a sense of responsibility for their own destiny and responsibility for their fellow man who willfully contribute, and not a moral mandate to be responsible for our fellow man, like it or not.