I'd be happy to pay more taxes to get, at the very least,
better social services for those who can't support themselves. I want to live in a world that cares for those people. If you prefer a selfish motivation, I also want those services to be available for me and my loved ones, should they be needed in the future.
The blocker is that I don't have the time, expertise, bargaining power, or economies of scale to efficiently turn my money into social services. Governments are much better suited to that task, and some do so reasonably effectively. (e.g. universal health care, in countries that provide it.)
I do give to charity, actually. That hardly precludes me from wishing my money, and others', was used more efficiently.
I feel like this isn't going how you were expecting. I was supposed to be exposed as a hollow "progressive" who's free with other people's money but is secretly a grasping hypocrite. You shouldn't assume everyone is selfish just because you are.
To add to your point - and not a detractor from your point, just because you don't have the means to solve a problem doesn't mean your not qualified to point it out.
You may not know how to fix it, but you can probably point out when you've got a compound fracture. If it isn't you with the broken bone, you're probably qualified to suggest that it probably is quite painful.
I've donated a fair sum already this month. I'm no more entitled to opine about the system than you are. It doesn't work like that.
Like you, I don't mind paying taxes. Hell, I look forward to seeing my tax bill. I also acknowledge I can pay more.
Err... I'm not kidding. I don't mind paying my taxes. I kind of like paying back to the system that enabled me to be where I am. On the other hand, I seriously wish they'd spend that money more wisely, or at least more in line with my values.
I grow weary of seeing functional equivalents to, "You're not solving the problem, your opinion is invalid." You don't have to contribute significantly to the solution to notice the problems. I feel that sort of thinking is just an excuse to maintain the status quo.
Re: "that enabled me to be where I am". There is no evidence-based way to determine where you would be in a parallel universe with different rules.
"I don't mind paying taxes." ... "I seriously wish they'd spend that money more wisely, or at least more in line with my values".
It's irrational to say, "I don't mind that money is being coerced from me by people who are squandering it and using it in ways that are not in line with my values."
I don't think that your position is actually conflicting, but perhaps misstated. That is to say, maybe what you don't mind is the concept of taxation as such. Yet you acknowledge that the actual people who, today, are charged with coercing money out of you are not spending it wisely or in line with your values. So of course you must mind. Otherwise why even mention that?
You're willing to pay more to solve a problem. Do it. No realy. Do it. The amount you're willing pay, pay that. It's that simple. Don't read more into it. Do it.
Let's say they would be willing to pay an increased tax of 5% on their income to help homeless people.
You're saying - "instead just give 5,000 dollars to a homeless person, done!"
I think the absurdity of the suggestion is apparent but just in case - there's the obvious issues of
1. Assuming OP is a software engineer with no knowledge of "the homeless plight" or the best economic mechanisms to drag someone out of homelessness, there's no way they could give the money away in a way that actually defeats the problem withouts significant research effort.
2. Donating to charity is a possibility, but is not as effective as "everyone paying 5% extra tax," which leads me to...
3. Rather than paying an extra 5% tax, the OP's most effective course of action would be to lobby the government and his/her local population to make efforts to pass legislation that enables the government to levy a tax on everyone, and then use that money to solve the homelessness problem.
So, just like the OP said, economies of scale, effectiveness.
I am mildly upset that everyone is somewhat attacking someone for wanting the right thing to happen but not just making it happen on their own. How absurd!
I think that this is an unfair criticism of someone who said in their very post, "economies of scale."
One person who wishes for governments to do more for the poor can't be held responsible for the entire homeless population in the nation. That's absurd.
The blocker is that I don't have the time, expertise, bargaining power, or economies of scale to efficiently turn my money into social services. Governments are much better suited to that task, and some do so reasonably effectively. (e.g. universal health care, in countries that provide it.)