“...to what degree are you allowed to keep it...?” [your property aka money]
At least this statist is consistent in his thought. If your property is not your property, the only question is how much can you get to keep and who gets to decide?
““...to what degree are you allowed to keep it...?” [your property aka money]”
The author’s proposal presents an interesting philisophical question in that giving away ones wealth is completely voluntary. Its not taken by the govt as taxes or required by regulation. The only inducement is public and self opinion of the rich guy. I have no doubt that if such a system caught on it would soon morph into coercion and confiscation. Its always funny to see leftists talking about morality since they know nothing about it. The question that’s missing in this proposal is what is the obligation of the recipient? I could argue (indisputably) that it is immoral for a person NOT to adequately support themselves or their family. It is a drain on society to be a parasite on hard working citizens because you have no skills that would be of use to your fellow man. Or maybe you are just too lazy to get out of bed. There is a moral code that says “If you don’t work you don’t eat”. I remember when it was a social stigma to be on welfare, until the RAT party banned shame, thereby increasing it’s voter base. Finally, if the author really believes his proposal is a good one he should lead by example and give whatever money he makes or saved for retirement to the poor. Then he can report back on how its working out for him.