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

Nowadays, doing charity has become a popular activity that many people participate in. This leads to the idea that everyone should contribute a stable part of their revenue to charity. From my point of view, there are some loop holes of this idea that lead to my disagreement. Ċ To begin with, obliging everyone to donate their money without considering their will does not seem to be a sound decision. This mean that it should not be expected a person to contribute their money with a cranky face because doing charity is not solely giving money but also the willingness to help others of donators. Another argument is that since workers are paid differently, giving a fixed amount of money seems fair but in the pattern of living standard, the lower-income people may find it more struggling in daily life than higher-income people do. This might make the situation decline because people with low income might become the ones who should receive charity. Last but not least, encouraging everyone to contribute money can be the root of social corruption. The result of this is that lazy people might take advantage of the policy to receive money from the ones who contribute their effort to make a better society. Those dependent people would be burden of community if the idea were supported. Ċ I accept that raising fund for poor people is a humane activity. It can help promote economy and motivate people to work harder. However, the disadvantages tend to overwhelm the advantages brought by the idea. Ċ To conclude, due to the differences in status and living condition, forcing everyone to donate money should not be encouraged. Instead, everyone can help poor people with voluntary activities or donating old clothes instead of money.