Mark Steel: Shall we let the rich decide who gets cured?

Wednesday 18 April 2012 10:12 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

However the dispute about tax and charity donations ends up, the one thing we must all agree on is how inspiringly generous these philanthropists are, selflessly donating chunks of money that, by coincidence, are the amount they would have had to pay in tax anyway. Even the Good Samaritan would have said: "That's TOO philanthropic, you're being a fool to yourself."

Instead of punishing this kindness, we should extend it, so rather than funding the NHS through compulsory taxation, we get millionaires to wander round a ward and give a few pounds if they see a patient they think deserves curing.

Instead of paying for kidney machines out of tax, patients will be free to scream away in the hope a banker pays for a "Fred Goodwin Centre of Dialysis", or keeps it for himself, depending on the mood he's in. Then we could stop the cruelty of forcing high earners to pay in other areas. Wages, for example, could be scrapped, and replaced by voluntary donations. So if the employer is in a giving frame of mind they might pay their staff, but if they don't feel like it, or forget, or would rather fund a solid-gold zebra crossing, they can. They will be free to choose.

The only thing unfair about the current debate is this system should apply to everyone, not just the rich. To start with, there could be a trial for a few items such as pork pies. When you buy a packet, you should have the choice of paying for them, or giving the money to a charity of your choice instead. Then, when the pork pie companies complain that this leaves them short of funds, everyone can go berserk and say, "Rob the charities would you, you heartless bastards."

Whenever someone in a pub puts a pound in the box for the local hospice, a pound should come off their tax, and if you give 20p to the woman sat under the cashpoint machine, that comes off your national insurance. If you put a fiver in the guide dog fund you should have your photo published in a glossy newsletter saying you're amazingly gorgeously unimaginably generous and be exempt from VAT for a month, and if the Government disagrees, everyone writes to the Daily Telegraph until they back down.

Some people might object that as charitable donations from businessmen have been allowed to replace their tax payments, those donations are actually our money. So when the plaques go up in schools and hospitals to thank the donors, they should really be thanking the rest of us. But that's because the rest of us are selfish pigs compared to the philanthropists.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in