# Can government social programs be replaced with a charitable mandate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 28, 2013, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949 "2013-04-28T21:02:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Joshuagenes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Joshuagenes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joshuagenes)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/61 "2013-04-29T04:34:12Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > That’s not how it works. You made a claim. You back it up with evidence. It’s your responsibility to find the book you cite and post the relevant section. We are under no burden to do it for you. > > You believe? You _believe_? No. You post a cite or you retract the claim. Clearly you didn’t read the papers that I linked they also cited this paper. Tanner, Michael. 1996. The End of Welfare. Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute. ---
**Author:** ![Joshuagenes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Joshuagenes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joshuagenes)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/62 "2013-04-29T04:46:42Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Which just demonstrates its inadequacy. It’s been tried. It doesn’t work. > > It’s not “faith”. It’s recognition that government has done a better job of constructing social safety nets than all of the alternatives. Government is simply better at this sort of thing. More efficient, more effective, usually even fairer. Has it really? By that token a charitable mandate is a government construction. The mandate maintains certain levels of overall charity by government force even when the morality of the people is low and they are less likely to give on their own. I don’t know how you are judging efficiency and effectiveness of the government. Is it by the prevailing wages they pay, or perhaps by the fact that it is a job for government workers rather than a cause, or perhaps the government acting as a middleman in an industry they also regulate. What about fairness is that regressive social security tax fair? How are we to judge fairness? What does it mean? ---
**Author:** ![Joshuagenes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Joshuagenes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joshuagenes)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/63 "2013-04-29T05:09:45Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Not that strong obviously, or we’d be seeing general social collapse into the neofeudal anarchy they want. > Garbage. It will create massive inequality, poverty and social instability - that’s what it always has done in the past. I’ll be keeping all my money for myself in that scenario; I’ll need it. That is Quite an opinion. If you act selfishly and the government finds out they will strip you of your assets and make you dependent upon the system which you have cheated. I highly suggest that you give selflessly. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/64 "2013-04-29T06:05:38Z")
> [@Joshuagenes](#): > > These people have strong infuence on the government you do trust. Do you still Trust the government? Do you trust the government when it is fill with elected people that you don’t agree with? > > At least the Charitable mandate allows you to put your money towards causes and people you do trust. They don’t have a strong influence on the Obama administration. They did on the Bush administration - and look how that turned out. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/65 "2013-04-29T06:07:00Z")
> [@Joshuagenes](#): > > The system already exists in voluntary form. Also it has existed much longer in the form of Jewish, Christian, and Muslim tithing. It has existed since ancient times while the government dole has come and gone. For some religious people it is mandatory but the mandate is from their church and not the government. Is it such a stretch to consider doing the same thing with secular government? Why put so much faith in the government who remains a single point of failure for the system? Mormons tithe today. But my understanding is that they don’t get to pick who they tithe to, they tithe to the church which distributes the money. So it is a lot more like a tax than it is your plan. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/66 "2013-04-29T06:16:40Z")
> [@Joshuagenes](#): > > Most certainly people do give to pet causes but if you make the assumption that people are stupid and won’t prioritize correctly with their giving it remains your responsibility to educate them otherwise. As to your assumption concerning how people give privately please provide documented evidence to make your case. I highly doubt the reprecussions that you suggest as all these things are provided by private charities currently. Also please explain why you should be the judge of how people ought to give rather than themselves. No, the charities would do the “education.” Do you get mailings from charities? Do you see charity ads in TV and in magazines and on-line? Who is going to pay for these? The charities, out of the donations. And who gets the money? The ones representing the greatest need or the ones with the best ads? What happens to the kids being served by charities which don’t advertise very well, or aren’t the cause of the month? As for volunteering, exactly how many charities can you volunteer in? Especially if you have a job and family, What about those helping people far away from you? In addition, the greatest need occurs during recessions, exactly when giving will be reduced. The government still can help, what about when there is 10% unemployment? BTW, who certifies that the charity is legitimate? Don’t tell me that they will be - lots of Silicon Valley companies don’t do United Way anymore since they had corruption at a high level. And that was local. Do you want people to get ripped off, or do you want a massive bureaucracy? Your choice. ---
**Author:** ![bchris964](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f14d63/32.png) [@bchris964](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bchris964)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/67 "2013-04-29T08:05:46Z")
> [@Joshuagenes](#): > > It seems reasonable to me that government social programs can be replaced by a charitable mandate. > > Here is how it would work. A law would be passed that would require people to give 10% of their income either directly to the poor or to a private institution, or to a govenment social program open to recieving donations. Those that fail to pay will be stripped of their assets and made dependent upon the system which they have cheated. You would record where you gave and reciever would record from whence they got. The charity recieved would count toward fuflfillment of the governments promised obligation. Oversite would be provided by the IRS. > > What this mandate does is cut out the slow,inefficient, and ineffective middle man(the govenment) and exchanges it for highly accountible, efficient, and effective givers and charities. > > I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter. Thanks --Joshua hi Joshuagenes, it is good idea but it may create several problems for local charitable authorities. firstly, local authorities can’t handle the whole population due to smaller size of charitable organizations as compared to Governments. Secondly, local authorities can perform illegal activities and may not distribute charitable money to deserving people. thirdly, everyone will bound to pay 10 percent flat rate which may be created several problems to low income inhabitants. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 9:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/68 "2013-04-29T09:25:46Z")
Another problem which I don’t think has been mentioned, although I could be wrong, is that donating to charities doesn’t eliminate the middle man. Charities are middle men. The only way to eliminate the middle man is to help someone directly, yourself. Furthermore, charities, being non-profits, have all the pathologies of governments. You’ve got an organization handling money that isn’t really theirs and no one really has any incentive to make sure it’s spent wisely. And a lot of people actually get pretty rich working in the non-profit sector. The system we have now, where you pay taxes and get deductions if you give to charity, works best. The best system of all would be one in which we give everyone the personal help they need, but that’s never going to happen. Most people are generous enough to give to the poor, but they don’t actually want to have them around, which is why charities that actually help poor people directly often have a hell of a time getting a permit to set up an office. Middle class folks don’t want poor people in their neighborhoods. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/69 "2013-04-29T09:36:44Z")
If relying on private charity was such a great system for thousands of years as the OP claims, then why did government start spending on social causes in the first place? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/70 "2013-04-29T10:18:11Z")
Well, that’s a little more complicated. Part of it was that charities weren’t always operating where there was need, but another part was the stigma. The government wants people to feel entitled to help and not feel humiliated by it. The government is wrong, of course. We actually got the worst of both worlds. Welfare does stigmatize, AND the recipients often feel entitled to it. Great way to create societal fissures. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/71 "2013-04-29T10:29:16Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If relying on private charity was such a great system for thousands of years as the OP claims, then why did government start spending on social causes in the first place? Because the levels of giving are much too low for the task, poorly distributed, and non-government groups are typically more corrupt and less efficient. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 10:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/72 "2013-04-29T10:40:55Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Sounds a lot like the Islamic practice of [Zakat.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zakat) Tithes, as others have said. Thing is… someone has to control what a person’s income actually is, right? So, I would have to give 10% (of my total income or after taxes?) to a charity and do so in a form I’d be able to report to the government. That would mean I’d be making a single payment, just for ease of paperwork. I say “of my total income or after taxes”, because - are we supposed to turn road maintenance into a charity? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/73 "2013-04-29T10:50:19Z")
Another issue with private charity is that often it would be led by a person or small group of people, and end when they died. Those who thought forward and had the power for it would set up a fund, but this wasn’t something the immense majority of people had the power or means to do until relatively recently. And even those which got set up would sometimes get discontinued; lands and other sources of income granted to privately-funded hospitals, hospices, orphanages or schools sometimes got “redistributed” by a greedy government, or one which had been set up with a royal fund got dropped during a budget redistribution (they were considered personal charity of the king or queen who’d founded the place, but he or she had left a mandate to keep it funded). ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/74 "2013-04-29T11:10:23Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Because the levels of giving are much too low for the task, poorly distributed, and non-government groups are typically more corrupt and less efficient. Charities exist for, well, charity. Governments spend the bulk of their money on non-charitable purposes, giving far more money to the politically powerful constituencies than the people who actually need it. Since these entitlements for the middle class and wealthy are necessary to maintain public support for aid to the poor, that money has to be counted as an overhead expense. Also, take those administrative expenses estimates with a grain of salt. Most government programs don’t aggressively fight fraud. Fraud is waste, and thus also must count towards overhead when comparing the relative efficiency of government vs. the non-profit vs. the profit sector. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/75 "2013-04-29T12:55:40Z")
> [@Joshuagenes](#): > > Here is a link to a recent policy paper by Michael Tanner.[http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA694.pdf](http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA694.pdf) Robert Woodson stated: “on average, 70 cents of each dollar budgeted for government assistance goes not to the poor, but to the members of the welfare bureaucracy and others serving the poor.” The Michael Tanner paper you provided states, “Yet this year the federal government will spend more than $668 billion on at least 126 different programs to fight poverty.” Is it your belief that of the $668 billion spent by the US government on poverty programs, that only $200 billion will actually reach the poor, and the rest is basically non-productive overhead? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/76 "2013-04-29T14:07:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Those who are against this system but who favor Obamacare, can you describe the difference? Well, they’re really not similar at all, are they? In Obamacare the mandate is to purchase coverage for yourself to cover catastrophic injury or illness that would otherwise be paid by the population as a whole. It is to combat a free rider problem. There are no free riders in SS (to simplify it to the one program that the OP seems to be focusing on with his comments about helping his grandparent). An old-age retirement pension system similar to Obamacare would be a marketplace of defined benefit plans that kick in at 72 (or whatever). Everyone would be mandated to purchase coverage for themselves or pay a fine. There would be no SS, but rather your minimum income in retirement would be defined by the plan you chose. This may or may not be preferable to the current US mandatory retirement pension plan - YMMV. > [@](#): > > The main difference is that we already have a huge, highly regulated Health Insurance infrastructure set up. If the government involved itself in regulating Charitable Institutions, there is no reason to think that it couldn’t work similarly. It would be a disaster if we implemented such a switch overnight, but had we been doing things this way for the last 200 years, we’d figure out a way to make it work. The interesting thing (well, to me at least), is that charitable organizations are intricately tied up in our broken health care system as well. A decent percentage of hospitals (all of the main ones in my city, at least) are non-profits. If we want to focus on health care I think the current system is a bit of a warning against allowing charities to run the show. ---
**Author:** ![OurLordPeace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/e8c25b/32.png) [@OurLordPeace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OurLordPeace)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/77 "2013-04-29T14:17:28Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > You’re providing a cite from the Ludwig von Mises Institute? They’re about as credible as the Institute for Policy Studies. What’s your/the problem with IPS? ---
**Author:** ![svd678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@svd678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/svd678)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/78 "2013-04-29T14:30:03Z")
I once calculaated how much money churches would have to raise to take care of all people in need in one area. I figured they would have to triple their income, at least, and that would still leave their own programs short. Central to the OP’s plan is “charities” which by definition are voluntary. Tell me how to do that. If by law, then its not charity. The Libertarian cite did not include figures on serving a whole population in need. The govt. is supposed to; charities usually choose a niche and restrict themselves to it. (because they don’t have money enough) ---
**Author:** ![Furious\_Marmot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/dfb087/32.png) [@Furious\_Marmot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Furious_Marmot)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/79 "2013-04-29T15:31:42Z")
> [@Joshuagenes](#): > > …A law would be passed that would require people to give 10% of their income either directly to the poor or to a private institution, or to a govenment social program open to recieving donations. Those that fail to pay will be stripped of their assets and made dependent upon the system which they have cheated… By “stripped of their assets and made dependent upon the system” you mean all of their assets, right? Because if it was just some of their assets, they wouldn’t be dependent on charity. So, if someone fails to pay what amounts to a 10% tax, you advocate a penalty equal to all of their assets. House, car, bank account, family business, the fridge with all of the food in it, clothes, insulin, oxygen bottles, wedding ring, the retirement nest egg that took a lifetime to build. All gone in a puff of confiscatory smoke. For underpaying on a the functional equivalent of a tax bill. Not for murder, or grand theft, or arson, or producing chemical weapons in the garage. Nor for failing to pay federal income tax, or FICA, or state taxes. Only for your special pet tax. That’s one important tax, there. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2013, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949/80 "2013-04-29T16:29:41Z")
> [@OurLordPeace](#): > > What’s your/the problem with IPS? The Institute for Policy Studies? They’re about as credible as the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Seriously, fringe groups - left, right, or whatever - are usually out on the fringe for a reason. If an idea is sensible it gets embraced by the masses and becomes part of the mainstream consensus. The ideas that can’t make that transition are almost always bad ideas. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-government-social-programs-be-replaced-with-a-charitable-mandate/656949.md?page=5)