Who here would describe themselves as not at all racist / sexist / xenophobic / homophobic / transphobicIf you meet those criteria: what is your opinion of class / rich people / non-rich people
i'm probably none of those, although i distinguish between actual transsexuals and weird internet-autist-otherkin trenders.i am openly classist. reduce the divide between classes through increased taxation, stop rewarding the wealthy.>but i earneds it!!! ;___;don't care, you don't need that much wealth when others are struggling. charity should not exist in current year.
>>85272185Your opinion on all of that is essentially just the normie mainstream opinion in the Western world though.(Though it is also the correct one)Minus charity. Obviously you need both taxation (including some more taxation in the upper income brackets) and charity. Charity will always be needed, and good, in any current or future society on top of state taxation and redistribution.
>>85272203i honestly don't know either way anon.>Minus charity. Obviously you need both taxation (including some more taxation in the upper income brackets) and charity. Charity will always be needed, and good, in any current or future society on top of state taxation and redistribution.i mean charity is a Christian concept, right, like 'almsgiving'. maybe to some American (yes i am obsessed) it is essential and noble, but 'hospitals' were Christian do-gooding once. now in many countries, they are completely secular. they will even treat horrible criminals, free at the point of access.not knocking religion itself, if that's your belief system, or if it's what motivates you. but fucking hell as civilisation we feel centuries behind in a lot of ways. and a lot of things are getting worse (more people now want to outright OWN houses--that's now the default--and some even want to own 'ideas' until AFTER they're dead).
>>85272219Well I'm an atheist. But no charity is not inherently religious. Christianity promotes charity and most charity giving may be via religion but that's basically just coincidental.The state can only allocate resources/taxes so well. Charity is good. It is an addition to the good the government can (hypothetically) do.A lot of charities are also highly inefficient and misallocate things, and sometimes are outright fraudulent or quasi-fraudulent (where they spend way too much on operations/salaries), but they help benevolent people be more benevolent. For example, many people may want to contribute more than what they would be taxed.
