Charitable Giving

Discussion in 'Politics' started by OldRegular, Jan 11, 2009.

  1. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    In the following article George Will shows that Cold Blooded Conservatives give about 30% more to charity than warm blooded liberals. WHY?

    Conservatives More Liberal Givers
    By George Will

    Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

    WASHINGTON -- Residents of Austin, Texas, home of the state's government and flagship university, have very refined social consciences, if they do say so themselves, and they do say so, speaking via bumper stickers. Don R. Willett, a justice of the state Supreme Court, has commuted behind bumpers proclaiming "Better a Bleeding Heart Than None at All," "Practice Random Acts of Kindness and Senseless Beauty," "The Moral High Ground Is Built on Compassion," "Arms Are For Hugging," "Will Work (When the Jobs Come Back From India)," "Jesus Is a Liberal," "God Wants Spiritual Fruits, Not Religious Nuts," "The Road to Hell Is Paved With Republicans," "Republicans Are People Too -- Mean, Selfish, Greedy People" and so on. But Willett thinks Austin subverts a stereotype: "The belief that liberals care more about the poor may scratch a partisan or ideological itch, but the facts are hostile witnesses."

    Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.

    If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

    -- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

    -- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

    -- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

    -- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

    -- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

    -- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

    Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.

    The single biggest predictor of someone's altruism, Willett says, is religion. It increasingly correlates with conservative political affiliations because, as Brooks' book says, "the percentage of self-described Democrats who say they have 'no religion' has more than quadrupled since the early 1970s." America is largely divided between religious givers and secular nongivers, and the former are disproportionately conservative. One demonstration that religion is a strong determinant of charitable behavior is that the least charitable cohort is a relatively small one -- secular conservatives.

    Reviewing Brooks' book in the Texas Review of Law & Politics, Justice Willett notes that Austin -- it voted 56 percent for Kerry while he was getting just 38 percent statewide -- is ranked by The Chronicle of Philanthropy as 48th out of America's 50 largest cities in per capita charitable giving. Brooks' data about disparities between liberals' and conservatives' charitable giving fit these facts: Democrats represent a majority of the wealthiest congressional districts, and half of America's richest households live in states where both senators are Democrats.

    While conservatives tend to regard giving as a personal rather than governmental responsibility, some liberals consider private charity a retrograde phenomenon -- a poor palliative for an inadequate welfare state, and a distraction from achieving adequacy by force, by increasing taxes. Ralph Nader, running for president in 2000, said: "A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity." Brooks, however, warns: "If support for a policy that does not exist ... substitutes for private charity, the needy are left worse off than before. It is one of the bitterest ironies of liberal politics today that political opinions are apparently taking the place of help for others."

    In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore "gave at the office." By using public office to give other peoples' money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word.
    [email protected]
     
  2. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only thing I can imagine as a reason is that liberals naturally tend to want more government involvement in our lives, and therefore think the government can make better decisions about who we should give our money to than we can.

    I guess poor Al had to buy all sorts of energy saving devices for his humble abode and could not afford to share his modest income.
     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,273
    Likes Received:
    777
    It just shows the liberal hypocrisy
     
  4. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    And that's on top of the "charitable giving" we're forced to do to the IRS every year.
     
  5. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    That is what liberals call charitable giving!
     
  6. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    Arthur Brooks
     
  7. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Another thing that irks me is the constant misapplication of Christ's admonishments to people concerning the poor. Anyone who studies the New Testament knows how badly the Jewish religious authorities in Roman Israel treated the poor, & the lepers, mocking how much they gave or didn't give, and not even letting the lepers in the church. Some supposedly Bible-drilled people here try and tell me that lesson is strictly for American conservatives. It's a shamefully myopic view of scripture.
     
  8. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294

    You are so right.

    I've seen the "misapplication" you are talking about being applied right here at BB.
     
  9. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, look at it this way.

    Christians in general are going to be Republican, and many believe they are REQUIRED to donate 10% of their income to the church.
    That already gives "conservative" states a higher donation level.

    On the other hand, Christian Republicans with money know how to work the system. They know of the tax breaks they get by donating to certain charities. While it's also true for the liberals, they have more of a tendency to believe in even-spread charity run from the top, while many conservatives simply donate privately to where it is most profitable to themselves.

    Charity is almost a joke. Take away the tax breaks and see how charitable many (I said many, not all, there are some good eggs out there I'm sure, just happen to know one too many rotten ones) of those rich charitable Christians remain.

    Liberals work more on overall change from the top and in general, appear more genuine to me than most of the typical conservatives today, who appear to only want change if it's good for their bank accounts.

    TRUE conservatives are a rare breed, and the truest of them all are the most generous, caring, LIBERAL HEARTED people on earth. :love2:

    They're also usually the poorest, as they don't knock themselves senseless trying to figure out how to hoard enough riches for themselves. They share what they have as it comes, not if they can spare it or if it will enhance their own bank accounts.
     
  10. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    According to this silly stuff, as a liberal of sorts I am giving too much of my money away and I had better cut back, at least to the conservative sums.

    By the way, have you ever asked how much some of these Christian charities take out of donations for administration costs? I stopped giving to a Christian charity that supports children and I send the cash directly to a missionary in Africa who gives it to needy famiies in her field...no administration costs!

    Some liberal, what? Wait, I am a socialist.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  11. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe the libs don't feel it necessary to buy their way into Heaven. <G>
     
  12. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    I think Frank Luntz had a poll recently on Fox News which indicated the preponderance of liberals [democrats] were not very religious. Whether they believe in Heaven is questionable. Perhaps you can answer that.
     
  13. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    Huh? Let me rephrase that and you tell me if I misunderstand.

    "Whether or not Democrats believe in Heaven is questionable."

    Is that what you meant to say?
     
  14. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's a good point, Jim, and I've re-directed some of my donations for the same reasons. A good place to check out a charity is <http://www.guidestar.org/> that provides some reports of the receipts are used. This is one reason why I believe the best work is done by local churches through the oversight of qualified deacons. These men are charged with making decisions on the use of benevolent donations of the members.
     
  15. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Many people give to charities [especially those pushed on TV] indiscriminately with the attitude: "My intention is good regardless of whether the charity is misusing the money or not." As far as I am concerned that is worse than not giving. It is also my experience that many churches use far too much of their income for staff salaries and building bigger barns.

    I gave money to a certain children's fund for 10 years or so, even got letters and pictures from a fictional boy in Mexico only to find out it was a fraud.
     
  16. NiteShift

    NiteShift
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, like when the Clintons donated their used underwear and took a tax deduction for it. Course they're not republicans but still [​IMG]
     
  17. NiteShift

    NiteShift
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Double post. Now how did that happen
     
    #17 NiteShift, Jan 13, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2009
  18. SBCPreacher

    SBCPreacher
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    That may be what you're doing when you give, but that's not what I'm doing!
     
  19. Gina B

    Gina B
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,944
    Likes Received:
    1
    The upload drive was feeling charitable. Must be a Republican computer...gave double but it still had no effect.
    *running away*
     
  20. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Many on the board and in the church say that Democrats can't be Christians. To me that's the worst form of slander. People must be looked at as individuals not as members of a group. In fact, I would claim that those who claim that all liberals are going to Hell don't give a comforting indication of their own eternal destiny. First of all, they never define "liberals." That word means different things to different people. To these radicals, it means anyone who doesn't agree with everything they say.
     

Share This Page

Loading...