'Everybody should donate a fixed amount of their income to support charity'. How far do you share this viewpoint?
Answer:
The issue of donation continues to be widely debated, and giving fixed amount of income is accepted as dominated international thinking. While it is considered by some that charity supporting could be from other sectors, I personally agree with the idea that workers should afford some money for charity.
Firstly, it seems advisable that charity prompts a chance for people as doing good deeds. As we can see, this supports the others by providing aids such as meal distribution, school uniform allocation, or running fine-tuned social programme. In Indonesia, for instance, people tend to do public dues with fixed amount of money for every month owing to a social movement called Indonesia Mengajar -- a charity providing teachers for rural village schools in many regions of Indonesia. In addition, it might be seen that one major benefit of continuing supporting charity is occuring more stable financial condition for charity. In spite of merely small amount of money, workers invoke larger financial support thanks to doing it together for considerably significant impact. Lastly, it is logical to said that through donating their income, people more attach with others helped by them for more empathize.
I do appreciate that some people think differently, saying that financial income for charity can be afforded by sponsorship from companies, and donation is not workers' duty. However, I believe that this proportion could be unwise, considering the variety of advantages that donating fixed amount of income might create.
To conclude, it seems for me that giving our income as donation is the wiser option, not solely for chance of doing positive things, but also for charities' stable financial income and encouraging positive attachment.
charity donation
Answer:
The issue of donation continues to be widely debated, and giving fixed amount of income is accepted as dominated international thinking. While it is considered by some that charity supporting could be from other sectors, I personally agree with the idea that workers should afford some money for charity.
Firstly, it seems advisable that charity prompts a chance for people as doing good deeds. As we can see, this supports the others by providing aids such as meal distribution, school uniform allocation, or running fine-tuned social programme. In Indonesia, for instance, people tend to do public dues with fixed amount of money for every month owing to a social movement called Indonesia Mengajar -- a charity providing teachers for rural village schools in many regions of Indonesia. In addition, it might be seen that one major benefit of continuing supporting charity is occuring more stable financial condition for charity. In spite of merely small amount of money, workers invoke larger financial support thanks to doing it together for considerably significant impact. Lastly, it is logical to said that through donating their income, people more attach with others helped by them for more empathize.
I do appreciate that some people think differently, saying that financial income for charity can be afforded by sponsorship from companies, and donation is not workers' duty. However, I believe that this proportion could be unwise, considering the variety of advantages that donating fixed amount of income might create.
To conclude, it seems for me that giving our income as donation is the wiser option, not solely for chance of doing positive things, but also for charities' stable financial income and encouraging positive attachment.
