Has anyone formally studied idea that philanthropy undermines civil society by replacing redistribution taxation with discretionary?
Conversation
Replying to
you mean because better info gets to the market about what people want if they spend their luxury money on goods and services?
1
1
Replying to
. No, because it frames redistribution as Randian burden freely borne rather than paying society back for use of shared resources
1
3
Replying to
no, that's what taxation is. Redistribution is very different. Charity to a hobo is not paying for use of shared resources like roads
1
Replying to
Nope, you're forgetting opportunity costs, social costs borne by others etc. Redistribution has a basis in payback as for roads
1
1
Replying to
you're really really going to have to start actually explaining what you mean here for me to believe it at all.
2
Replying to
like give me some actual examples of what you mean by philanthropy compared to the government interacting in the same field
1
2
Replying to
See Jacobin article I started with. Idea of universal healthcare being funded by charity. Godawful idea rife with moral hazard.
2
Replying to
as is universal health care funded by the government! Unless you suddenly think markets are evilz
2
Replying to
Yes, but it at least eliminates some kinship biases, tragedy of commons etc.
Replying to
yes government certainly never suffers from those issues
1
1
Show replies

