Hacker News Reader

What is your evidence, beyond an apriori argument, that this would lead to something helpful?

Why should I be compelled by the state to give my money to something that isn't clearly helpful to society?

As I mention in my comment, there's no problem with letting people opt out.

Is this something akin to that checkbox on your tax return indicating you want to donate $3 to the Presidential Election Campaign fund? I think the main difference is that it would be an extra amount you'd pay, rather than having the government allocate that $3 from the total amount that was going to the treasury.

https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understand...

Except the PEC goes to political candidates and this money would materially help someone each year. Every person in the country could use the PEC and candidates would still need to court donations from PACs and other groups. $300k to a set number of families? We could write articles about them each year to see how this changed their lives. Even if the recipients are already wealthy it would turn into an interesting story.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com