‘Everybody should donate a fixed amount of their income to support charity.’ How far do you share this viewpoint?

It appears that people ought to give some part of their money for the sake of charity help. I accept that people may donate to charity, in spite of

this

Linking Words

I agree that not everybody should do it as it depends on their willingness and earnings. On the one hand, a donation to philanthropy should be assumed by everyone as a duty they have to do on behalf of assistance homeless, poor, or orphans. If everybody were contributed a fixed amount of their expenses, it would significantly increase the resolution of problems with the poor, people without a home, and improve the lives of children in orphanages.

For example

Linking Words

, in France, there is a law which obligates each individual to pay 5% of their wages on any type of mercy,

hence

Linking Words

,

this

Linking Words

country has a low level of homeless and struggling with money,

moreover

Linking Words

, all philanthropy fund can be used for country enhancement.

On the other hand

Linking Words

, not each individual may support a charity for some reasons. It is common knowledge that philanthropy cannot be forced,

thus

Linking Words

, if everybody were obligated to pay regularly, it would turn out to taxes rather mercy.

In addition

Linking Words

, each individual has a different level of wages which regard to distinguish spending. People whose earning is less than to make a living unlikely to donate their capital in contrary to those who have a stable and high salary. In conclusion,

although

Linking Words

some fixed part of people’s wages ought to be given to welfare, it would depend on their desire to help and income level due to unequal payment of each person.