>>385033>It's a policy by the rich for the rich.
You receive exactly the same deduction benefit by donating to charity. >Instead of using that money to help the poor and the needy or to improve the various aspects of the country
You mean by paying taxes on it? Your really don't understand how this works at all, do you? The charity deduction IS the government using that money. Let's see if your feeble, class-envious brain can follow:
I earn $100 dollars. The government gets $30 of it in taxes. I spend the remaining $70 on dinner for me and the wife. (Of which the local government takes $5 in sales tax.) Of that tax money, about a third goes to "entitlements". (Another third goes to debt service on bonds, but you just go and ignore who holds those bonds.) So total amount received by the "needy," assuming zero overhead and corruption: $11.
Alternatively, I earn $100. I donate it to Remote Area Medical. The $30 the would have collected goes to RAM. The $5 goes to RAM. So total amount received by the needy $100.
In what possible way is this worse?
Also, support Remote Area Medical. They're amazing.>only the rich benefit
In what way do the rich benefit? If anything, as stock and bond holders, they benefit more from taxes.