Everybody should donate a fixed amount of their income to support charity. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In

this

contemporary world, donating a certain

amount

of money to charitable trusts become common. In my opinion, I strongly disagree with the statement because mandating a fixed

amount

for everyone will be seen as an infringement of their privacy and

this

process will lose its value

due to

external compulsion. The primary reason is, that people do not have a steady income and most of them are dependent on daily wages.

Due to

the lack of unemployment in society, youngsters are running behind jobs to help their families and in

such

cases

Add a comma

cases,

show examples

this

will cause distress and no one should intervene in their financial situations.

For example

, In some parts of India, workers get their payments delayed and in

such

cases, fixed payments perhaps get missed.

Hence

, making

such

amendments will not definitely suit them. The second main reason to avoid mandating the target

amount

for charitable organisations is, that

this

compulsion changes the positive mindset of the persons who are ready to provide support and help the nation.

For instance

, sometimes people have to spend

lump

Correct article usage

a lump

show examples

sum

amount

to

Change preposition

on

show examples

their families in case of any medical emergencies and unexpected educational expenses which will result in missing the deadline.

Thus

, Forcing someone to provide charity in

this

kind of situation will change their mindset towards their handout for non-profit organisations. In conclusion, I wholeheartedly disagree with the compulsion of donations to charitable institutions because it apparently affects the individual's financial circumstances and modifies the nature of embracing the philanthropy act.