> So you're saying that you yourself contribute regularly to heart, lung, skin, eye, and bone marrow cancers?
One, you don't necessarily need to donate to different charities for every possible disease. You could donate to a charity "fund" sort of like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.
Two, I think most people don't donate a lot of money because they feel they are already contributing a lot to benefit society via taxation.
> You could donate to a charity "fund" sort of like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.
So some sort of central fund for cancer research, where bureaucrats distribute funding to constituent organizations... Hmm where have I heard that before? ;)
> they feel they are already contributing a lot to benefit society via taxation.
So you _do_ admit it is benefitting society?
> So some sort of central fund for cancer research, where bureaucrats distribute funding to constituent organizations... Hmm where have I heard that before? ;)
That's like comparing social security to a personal retirement account.
I certainly agree the government is not an ideal re-allocator of wealth. I think it needs to be reformed. But saying "Hey this isn't ideal, so we should throw it away" is kind of silly, no?