[jonfw]

> you effectively have more power in the government than many other citizens

Why would my charitable giving give me power in the government?

> the more say you have in appropriating what could be government money.

Everything could be government money, my house could be a government house, my wife could be a government woman, etc.

Just because the government has the power to seize it doesn't mean they should or that it's theirs

[ckosidows]

> Why would my charitable giving give me power in the government?

I feel like I already outlined this, but it bears repeating. Taxation gives money to the government and the government decides how to spend it. If the government spends it poorly we can vote out those who use it improperly. You can't vote Jeff Bezos out of the country.

> Everything could be government money, my house could be a government house, my wife could be a government woman, etc.

Technically a percentage of you house is claimed by the government through property tax and your wife isn't property and I hope you know that.

[sokoloff]

I think GP was objecting to your somewhat casual "[that money] could be government money" and then drawing a link from there to "effectively have more power in the government" which isn't at all obvious to me nor the GP how charitable giving gives you that special government (monopoly on the use of force) power. It did not strike me that they lacked an understanding of the mechanics of taxation.