Page 1 of 4 [ 63 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

08 Apr 2014, 8:49 pm

http://rednationrising.wordpress.com/2013/06/04/who-gives-more-conservatives-or-liberals/

Quote:
Liberals claim to care more for the poor and needy and essentially claim conservatives are greedy people who make their riches from the sweat of the poor. It would seem if such were the case, liberals would give more to charity than conservatives. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Truth

In 2006 Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University published a book titled “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.“

Some glaring examples he found in his research:

Vice President Al Gore’s charitable giving in 1997 was only $353.

Senator John Kerry, presidential candidate in 2004, gave nothing to charity in more than one year when he was a U.S. Senator. Kerry’s 1991–1995 charitable contributions were ($0, $820, $175, $2039, $0), less than one-half of one percent of his income for the period.

In contrast, private citizen George W. Bush gave ($28,236, $31,914, $31,292) in 1991–1993. His highest giving was 15.7 percent of income and his average 9.1 percent. As Texas governor he gave $27,000 (6.5 percent of income) and $9,178 (2.3 percent) in the next two years, after which his giving returned to higher levels.

Conservatives Give More Than Blue Dems

Although Blue Dem 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. Conservatives give more blood.

Residents of states which 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 of the vote, 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.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


khaoz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2013
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,940

08 Apr 2014, 9:17 pm

It's not how much you give, but how much you care that matters. Giving is not all about money. Giving is about love and caring. How much would Conservatives be giving if there was not a tax write off to be gained? You can tell by how Conservatives treat the poor, the sick and the elderly how much they actually care. And quite frankly, bragging about how much one gives to charity is hardly an act of virtue. That makes the "giving" more about the giver than about the recipient. I think the Bible has some teachings about that particular behaviorism. That is, if the right wing revisionists have not already removed the teachings from the Bible that illuminate their hypocrisy.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,148
Location: Aux Arcs

08 Apr 2014, 9:31 pm

It would depend on the person,not their political affiliation.


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

08 Apr 2014, 9:42 pm

/\ The point is that conservatives on average shell out more than liberals in terms of charitable donations. More than the liberals that bemoan about how the heartless conservatives hate the needy and only think of their money, etc.....


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,148
Location: Aux Arcs

08 Apr 2014, 9:52 pm

That does not cover ever liberal or conservative.And don't people get tax breaks for giving to a charity?How many have stood in soup kitchens donating time?No record of that.


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

08 Apr 2014, 10:15 pm

Misslizard wrote:
That does not cover ever liberal or conservative.And don't people get tax breaks for giving to a charity?

Read again \/
Raptor wrote:
/\ The point is that conservatives ***on average*** shell out more than liberals in terms of charitable donations. More than the liberals that bemoan about how the heartless conservatives hate the needy and only think of their money, etc.....

av·er·age noun \ˈa-v(ə-)rij\
: a number that is calculated by adding quantities together and then dividing the total by the number of quantities

: a level that is typical of a group, class, or series : a middle point between extremes

Quote:
How many have stood in soup kitchens donating time?No record of that.
There's no tax break for my Humane Society volunteer work, either. Nor is there one for non-monetary donations like food drives, Toys for Tots, animal shelter donation drives, etc....
Obviously, if there is a tax break then it should be taken advantage of but not all donations fall under that category but are still donated just the same.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,148
Location: Aux Arcs

08 Apr 2014, 10:25 pm

Maybe their net worth is more so they can afford to give more.Maybe they actually feel some guilt about getting all their wealth by stepping on the necks of poor people.They most likely have money rat holed in the Caymans anyway,you'd never know much they really have.Same goes for rich Democrats.I'd be wary of the super wealthy regardless of their politics,there are different laws for them.
Good for them,tossing a few crumbs out.


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

08 Apr 2014, 10:28 pm

Rednationrising. Red Nation, huh? Sounds like Communism to me, comrade.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,148
Location: Aux Arcs

08 Apr 2014, 10:29 pm

^:lol:


_________________
"Security is mostly a superstition.It does not exist in nature,nor do the children of men as a whole experience it.Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure.Life is either a daring adventure,or nothing." Helen Keller


simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

08 Apr 2014, 10:34 pm

You have to factor in giving to churches and what % actually goes to the needy versus keeping some yokel in a mega-church in nice clothes. Sure, it keeps the guy from selling cleaning products through informercials but...

Utah is usually the top of the list. 10% of their income to.....build more Mormon churches? Thank Moroni for that. I bet Scientologists give a very high % of their income too.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

08 Apr 2014, 10:39 pm

Liberals id say since conservatives rather use their money buying more gas for their gas guzzling SUVs and Musclecars!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

08 Apr 2014, 10:42 pm

People also get tax breaks for donating to opera houses and universities, hardly renowned as havens for the poor and the suffering. I consider those donations important, but of a different sort than donations to the struggling food banks and battered women's shelters.

Liberal governments in other countries also give a lot of money in foreign aid to poor people, and take in more refugees as a percentage of their population. Those liberal voters know that they will pay higher taxes to cover those costs, and continue to vote in liberal representatives.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

08 Apr 2014, 10:44 pm

TheGoggles wrote:
Rednationrising. Red Nation, huh? Sounds like Communism to me, comrade.

Red as in red states, I assume.
Calling me comrade doesn't bother me. I can't say the same for some liberals. :twisted:


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

08 Apr 2014, 11:30 pm

simon_says wrote:
I bet Scientologists give a very high % of their income too.


You have no idea. Check out the book Going Clear, or listen to one of the author Lawrence Wright's interviews on BookTV. Spoiler: all the income, unless you're famous.



RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,292
Location: Minnesota, United States

08 Apr 2014, 11:30 pm

Raptor wrote:
TheGoggles wrote:
Rednationrising. Red Nation, huh? Sounds like Communism to me, comrade.

Red as in red states, I assume.
Calling me comrade doesn't bother me. I can't say the same for some liberals. :twisted:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN3MZ64I-Ds[/youtube]



The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,262
Location: Reading, England

09 Apr 2014, 4:50 am

simon_says wrote:
You have to factor in giving to churches and what % actually goes to the needy versus keeping some yokel in a mega-church in nice clothes. Sure, it keeps the guy from selling cleaning products through informercials but...

Utah is usually the top of the list. 10% of their income to.....build more Mormon churches? Thank Moroni for that. I bet Scientologists give a very high % of their income too.

I agree that it is important to consider those things, but I believe I'm right in saying the gap still exists after removing that and controlling for things like income.

Conservative Christians have some dodgy charity habits (Clicky - bolding mine):
Quote:
Gospel Coalition organisations have, for decades, operated a sort of “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. This works just as it did in the US army, as in not at all. LGBT people work for the Gospel Coalition organisations, they just lie about it. Some organisations force an actual signed affirmation of straightness, whereas others make it implicit. This is all part of a very important lie. According to the Gospel Coalition, LGBT Christians don’t actually work for the Gospel Coalition. This is because, according to the Gospel Coalition, there is no such thing as an LGBT Christian. Everyone must participate in this deception. If one group breaks ranks, the whole edifice of lies comes crashing down. World Vision broke ranks. It decided to allow LGBT Christians to serve openly. The Gospel Coalition acted quickly and decisively. It used its number one weapon: money. Franklin Graham, Denny Burke, and other such despicable excuses for human beings urged that evangelicals across the US withdraw their support from World Vision. This generally comes in the form of those nice “sponsor a child” deals in which you get to have quite a tangible connection with the idea of saving one particular human life. It’s a nice model for development charities. Thousands of evangelicals took up the advice, and began the process of refusing to save the life of an innocent black child in order to blackmail World Vision into continuing to participate in the communal lie.

It worked a treat. The amount of support withdrawn would have put WV into severe difficulty, threatening more than just the lives of the individual children sponsored directly by the anti-humans who withdrew their support. WV did not expect that making a small change to their hiring policy based on their religious principles of honesty and love would result in them being almost instantly destroyed as an organisation. They underestimated how ruthless the GC was capable of being. The message was clear: “You back our line to the hilt every step of the way, or we take you down and take thousands of innocent lives as collateral damage, which you’ll have on your conscience – how does your principled stand feel now?”


... but they are far from "all conservatives".