Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

charlie and algernon

(13,447 posts)

7. I suppose you could limit which charities are eligable

Reply to LostOne4Ever (Reply #3)

Tue Aug 13, 2013, 03:57 PM

Aug 2013

Particularly limit it to those that do help the poor and disadvantaged.

As for the first choice, while I do agree that it's more important to spend money on food banks and shelters, I also think we absolutely do need to keep funding the arts. And I'd much rather the rich give their 10% to the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra as oppsed to getting the latest private jet.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If the rich HAD to give some of their money back, where would you prefer it go? [View all] charlie and algernon Aug 2013 OP

Social services. The government would just use it for the MIC n/t Catherina Aug 2013 #1

Tree planting. Lots of tree planting NoOneMan Aug 2013 #2

When given a choice of charities LostOne4Ever Aug 2013 #3

I suppose you could limit which charities are eligable charlie and algernon Aug 2013 #7

I voted infrastructure improvement Aerows Aug 2013 #4

I agree. Put it somewhere with a public benefit and an economic multiplier. LonePirate Aug 2013 #5

I also like the idea of a national fiber network like Google is slowly unrolling LonePirate Aug 2013 #6