Study: Red states more disposed to charitable giving than blue states

posted at 2:41 pm on August 20, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

According to a new survey of tax data by the Chronicle of Philanthropy, it appears that red states are much more prone to charitable donations than blue states — interesting, but not at all surprising when you think about it. Politico reports:

The eight states whose residents gave the highest share of their income — Utah, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina, Idaho, Arkansas and Georgia — all backed McCain in 2008. Utah leads charitable giving, with 10.6 percent of income given.

And the least generous states — Wisconsin, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire — were Obama supporters in the last presidential race. New Hampshire residents gave the least share of their income, the Chronicle stated, with 2.5 percent.

I’m always astounded by the degree to which people often accuse free enterprise of bringing out the worst aspects of humanity, such as ‘greed’ — but human ‘greed’ (which I personally prefer to call rational self-interest) is a fact of life, and only through government can people enforce their ‘greedy’ compulsions through fiat. In a free market, people’s ‘greed’ can only survive when they provide products and services that other people freely want, rather than whatever it is the government deems is good for them.

Looking at it that way, the discrepancy between charitable giving between red states and blue states makes sense. Liberals tend to see the government as a force for good and as the means of distributing fairness, and therefore rely on the government more to do so — while conservatives are more about taking matters into their own hands. As the study’s authors noted, “the reasons for the discrepancies among states, cities, neighborhoods are rooted in part in each area’s political philosophy about the role of government versus charity,” and in turn “religion has a big influence on giving patterns.” People don’t need government to motivate or force them to do good things, and it seems to me that putting your faith in something other than the power of the state can be a much more efficient and powerful motivator.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

When you expect the State to provide, there is no need for the individual to give. That exactly how many on the Left feel.

Its Lefty philosophy 101.

catmman on August 20, 2012 at 2:44 PM

No surprises here. It’s a well-known fact (among those who choose to educate themselves) that conservatives are more generous with their time, money and blood than liberals.

Washington Nearsider on August 20, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Hypocrites, charltans and degenerate dividers, rejoice!

Schadenfreude on August 20, 2012 at 2:46 PM

I’m so shocked!

mrscullen on August 20, 2012 at 2:46 PM

But I’m sure the blue states tax their citizens more, that counts as charitable, right?

/

Eren on August 20, 2012 at 2:48 PM

People don’t need government to motivate or force them to do good things, and it seems to me that putting your faith in something other than the power of the state is a much more efficient and powerful motivator.

Crazy talk.

If we aren’t building an ever more perfect society, there is just nothing to do. Ask anyone. Well, ask anyone who is anyone.

Axe on August 20, 2012 at 2:48 PM

I’m sure those in deep blue states paying huge amounts of taxes think that’s enough charity. The studies showing that we donate more than libs are boring; I really want a comparison between similar levels of charity provided by a church/local charity and the government.

It’d be a great tool to bludgeon some lib with; ‘I may not pay 50% in taxes, but I donate x% and it’s more effective’ etc.

John_Locke on August 20, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Let me also note that of those eight states on the most generous list, six are southern states with high percentages of African-Americans. Here in Georgia, for instance, 30% of the residents are black. I think that may factor into it because southern black people tend to be very generous in their contributions to churches and church based charities.

radjah shelduck on August 20, 2012 at 2:50 PM

The next thing you’ll be telling us is:

Obamuh is a Commie,

And Biden is really stupid.

OhEssYouCowboys on August 20, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Generally speaking, Lefty’s are takers — and never givers. They always have been. The only charity case they give to — and want given to — is themselves.

DUH

Hasn’t that always been obvious?

FlatFoot on August 20, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Well, I’m shocked…no, not really. Conservatives in general are optimistic, extremely generous, hard-working and faith-filled (IMHO). Yes there are exceptions on both sides, but most of the folks I encounter fit the bill.

indyvet on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Wonder what that percentage is when you substract mega-church tithing.

Pablo Honey on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I’m not surprised. It goes along with the fact that people with Obama bumper stickers on their car are much more rude drivers than those who do not. It goes to the sense of entitlement that these enemies of America has.

Happy Nomad on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Marxism despises charity. Charity requires free choices and private ownership in order to exist. When the state owns all, there is no charity, only brutality… murderous brutality at that.

theCork on August 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Old news. I love whipping out the liberal-written NYTs piece from a few years ago about how conservatives give far more of their time and money (percentage of their income-wise) then liberals whenever some lib posts about those greedy conservatives/republicans.

DethMetalCookieMonst on August 20, 2012 at 2:56 PM

When liberals hear this they probably think:
Think of all that misspent money that could have been more effectively used by the government and liberal “non”-profits instead of reich wing hate groups!

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM

As a Mississippian I always have this statistic in the back of my head. When I’m hammered with all the negative, I can turn back and say that Mississippians share what little they have with others, something liberals often talk about but show little inclination towards.

itsspideyman on August 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM

No surprises here. It’s a well-known fact (among those who choose to educate themselves) that conservatives are more generous with their time, money and blood than liberals.

Right, liberals are only generous with other peoples time and money.

jasetaro on August 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Wonder what that percentage is when you substract mega-church tithing. Pablo Honey on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

It’s a wash against Communist Party dues in blue states.

Akzed on August 20, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Republicans are givers.

Democrats are takers.

faraway on August 20, 2012 at 2:59 PM

See Romney vs. Obama-Biden giving record–combined, Joe-Bozo do not come near Mitt’s generosity, even using %, much less actual dollars. Again, Libs very generous with OTHERS’ money.

hillsoftx on August 20, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Wonder what that percentage is when you substract mega-church tithing.

Pablo Honey on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

What would be the point? Are you going to try to grade each charity according to its effectiveness in society? And if so, how would you define and measure that? Should we also subtract contributions to the ACLU? Or the SPLC?

jwolf on August 20, 2012 at 2:59 PM

I give a lot of stuff to Goodwill – but I don’t necessarily give a high percentage of my income precisely BECAUSE the government is already confiscating and wasting so much. If the government wasn’t picking my pocket so deeply, I could afford to donate more – which is how it really should be.

dentarthurdent on August 20, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Obama: You didn’t give that!

Fallon on August 20, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Giving per 2011 tax returns:

Obama $172,130

Romney $4,020,572

faraway on August 20, 2012 at 3:01 PM

No sh1t sherlock.

/re the study

rayra on August 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM

No no no. Conservative are evil, greedy, racist, stupid, evil, greedy, evil and evil. I know because liberals keep telling me so.

Yakko77 on August 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM

I don’t think this has anything to do with conservative vs. liberal; I think it’s more about religious vs. secular.

eaglescout_1998 on August 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Whenever someone goes “But, but, that’s because they just donate to churches”, be sure to whip this out. Shuts them up pretty damn fast.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1306501293-LSfBbWqw2s3HRPcggqPBZw

DethMetalCookieMonst on August 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Hold on now, blue states are more prone to give to charitable causes with other people’s money, so how about a little recognition of all the union people who have been saved thanks to blue states.

Bishop on August 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

New Englanders better start taking a closer look at themselves.
That is not a very flattering list.
They’d rather the govt. take it, than volunteer it.
Just as Lizzy says

Jabberwock on August 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

that is where the liberal and the social justice crowd gets it wrong. We as followers are the ones to give of ourselves in service andto share the fruits of our labor. In my endeavor to read through the Scripture, I never once saw Jesus asking Rome for help.
We are His hands and feet and we share with those less fortunate. So when the church focuses on the government/the world, it loses its focus on the Kingdom. Left leaning churches are much more able to condone abortion and gay marriage. Once the focus goes off of Christ, shut the doors….I have been through the Bible a number of times and find no where it tells us, the church, that abortion is ok and that gay marriage is ok if the world and government says it is ok.

crosshugger on August 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

As a Mississippian I always have this statistic in the back of my head. When I’m hammered with all the negative, I can turn back and say that Mississippians share what little they have with others, something liberals often talk about but show little inclination towards.

itsspideyman on August 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I was born and raised in Mississippi and, by this time next year, will be a part time resident of my home state.

This is one thing that’s always made me proud of Mississippians. They are very good and generous people, despite what anyone says.

kakypat on August 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

When you expect the State to provide, there is no need for the individual to give. That exactly how many on the Left feel.

Its Lefty philosophy 101.

catmman on August 20, 2012 at 2:44 PM

.

But I’m sure the blue states tax their citizens more, that counts as charitable, right?
/
Eren on August 20, 2012 at 2:48 PM

.
You both beat me to the general idea.

I’m sure that in the minds of the current Democrat leadership, taxes should be counted as charitable contributions by the Chronicle of Philanthropy within their survey, to make the results more “fair” as they define it.

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Wonder what that percentage is when you substract mega-church tithing.

Pablo Honey on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Churches are much better at caring for the poor and needy than government bureaucracies.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Are you going to try to grade each charity according to its effectiveness in society?

Close. His grade for charities is how much he and the left approve of them.

Eren on August 20, 2012 at 3:07 PM

OT Phyllis Diller passes, RIP funny lady…

Fallon on August 20, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Marxism despises charity. Charity requires free choices and private ownership in order to exist. When the state owns all, there is no charity, only brutality… murderous brutality at that.

theCork on August 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Marxism despises GOD the most. GOD loving people will not put up with a Dictator. GOD loving will help those in need. Marxism needs to be able to punish those they disagree with and starve them to death. Charity makes that difficult.

Marxism is all about forcing people to do what the State wants. Free will and GOD are not compatible. Allah is not GOD. Allah is not considered to have any power he is not GOD in the Christian or Jewish teachings of what GOD is. An honest Muslim will tell you they are atheist. Islam is a Marxist political system. It’s religion is secondary. Islam is just a method to get the people to accept their Dictator and Marxist system called Sharia.

Steveangell on August 20, 2012 at 3:08 PM

This is very old news.

In Old Europe, where government dwarfs even a Democrat’s dreams charitable giving is TINY.

Strangely enough most of Old Europe swapped God for State a while ago.

CorporatePiggy on August 20, 2012 at 3:08 PM

I’m sure that in the minds of the current Democrat leadership, taxes should be counted as charitable contributions by the Chronicle of Philanthropy within their survey, to make the results more “fair” as they define it.

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Absolutely. There’s no difference. Hence the guilt people should feel for not wanting to give or give more. Don’t you care about the children? This has always been about swapping one god for another.

Axe on August 20, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Liberals tend to see the government as a force for good and as the means of distributing fairness, and therefore rely on the government more to do so

I would bet real money liberals make up a smaller percentage of those who gift the US government for debt reduction as well.

Also, it just seems like if they were truly sincere in their belief that government is a force for good, fewer of them would be tax cheats. If anybody sees Mark or Denise Rich, please ask them.

I think intense hypocrisy and self deception is more responsible for the charitable giving gap than liberals seeing the government as a force for good.

MessesWithTexas on August 20, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Duh.

TXMomof3 on August 20, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Whenever someone goes “But, but, that’s because they just donate to churches”, be sure to whip this out. Shuts them up pretty damn fast.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1306501293-LSfBbWqw2s3HRPcggqPBZw
DethMetalCookieMonst on August 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

“Liberals show tremendous compassion when it comes to giving away other people’s money in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad.”

Yeah, but… what Pablo Honey said!

Akzed on August 20, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Wonder what that percentage is when you substract mega-church tithing.

Pablo Honey on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

.
It’s a wash against Communist Party dues in blue states.

Akzed on August 20, 2012 at 2:58 PM

.
Are you implying Pablo’, that Mega Churches hog all the tithes for themselves? That they don’t support or sponsor local charities?
.
Excellent response, Akzed.

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Most liberals are utter hypocrites who are only generous with other people money…

mnjg on August 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM

it’s easy to be generous with OPM.

ted c on August 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM

I don’t think this has anything to do with conservative vs. liberal; I think it’s more about religious vs. secular.

eaglescout_1998 on August 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM

If you skipped it, you might want to look it over. It backs you up:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1306501293-LSfBbWqw2s3HRPcggqPBZw

DethMetalCookieMonst on August 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Axe on August 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM

heh.

Study: The Sun sets in the West!

socalcon on August 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM

No surprises here. It’s a well-known fact (among those who choose to educate themselves) that conservatives are more generous with their time, money and blood than liberals.

Washington Nearsider on August 20, 2012 at 2:46 PM

I can’t remember if it was part of Brook’s study, but I also remember reading that conservatives are more likely to look after a sick or elderly relative, while liberals are more inclined to believe it’s the state’s job to do it for them.

Sharke on August 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The left cynically believe that we won’t take care of each other, so, they have the government do it. The right feels obligated to do so. It’s really pretty clear and I think this proves it.

If I were a lottery-playing kinda guy I would do so with the wish to win oodles of dough to help the truly needy for the rest of my life. That would be fun.

princetrumpet on August 20, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Study: Red states more disposed to charitable giving than blue states

These kinds of studies, quiet honestly are a waste of time and money. No matter what evidence you produce Liberals will never accept that they are not the most generous caring and compassionate people in America.

What does “You didn’t build that” really mean?

SWalker on August 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Whenever someone goes “But, but, that’s because they just donate to churches”, be sure to whip this out. Shuts them up pretty damn fast.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1306501293-LSfBbWqw2s3HRPcggqPBZw
DethMetalCookieMonst on August 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

.
Can someone provide me a “back door” into the NY Times?

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM

It’s true that religion is the essential reason conservatives give more, and religious liberals are as generous as religious conservatives. Among the stingiest of the stingy are secular conservatives.

According to Google’s figures, if donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do. But Mr. Brooks says that if measuring by the percentage of income given, conservatives are more generous than liberals even to secular causes.

In any case, if conservative donations often end up building extravagant churches, liberal donations frequently sustain art museums, symphonies, schools and universities that cater to the well-off. (It’s great to support the arts and education, but they’re not the same as charity for the needy. And some research suggests that donations to education actually increase inequality because they go mostly to elite institutions attended by the wealthy.)

Conservatives also appear to be more generous than liberals in nonfinancial ways. People in red states are considerably more likely to volunteer for good causes, and conservatives give blood more often. If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, Mr. Brooks said, the American blood supply would increase by 45 percent.

Axe on August 20, 2012 at 3:20 PM

Whenever someone goes “But, but, that’s because they just donate to churches”, be sure to whip this out. Shuts them up pretty damn fast.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1306501293-LSfBbWqw2s3HRPcggqPBZw

DethMetalCookieMonst on August 20, 2012 at 3:04 PM

I agree. I’ve had that liberal columnist’s column at the ready for nearly four years. The title is classi: “Bleeding Heart Tightwads.” It’s a crucifix, silver bullet, necklace of garlic, silver stake, ray of sunlight, and burning torch all rolled into one that I can wave at any liberal monsters to make them go away.

BuckeyeSam on August 20, 2012 at 3:22 PM

It would be nice if people in blue states, who give miserly to charity from their personal funds, would at least voluntarily donate more of their income to the federal government. Since it is they who demand higher taxes to pay for their benevolent giving, they should set a high standard and be an example for the red states on how dedicated to their cause of higher taxes they really are.

While they are at it, these bleeding heart liberals should fuel their homes in the winter with only power generated from wind and the sun. We can use them as a test case on how easy and cost effective it would be to not use fossil fuel.

iamsaved on August 20, 2012 at 3:22 PM

@listens2glenn:

http://www.mazeministry.com/incorrect/tightwad2.gif

:)

Axe on August 20, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Marxism despises charity. Charity requires free choices and private ownership in order to exist. When the state owns all, there is no charity, only brutality… murderous brutality at that.

theCork on August 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Excellent post… There is no other ideology in history that has killed more people than communism… and all in the name of equality, fairness, and taking care of the poor… At the end in every place communism has been tried almost everyone ended equally poor and miserable without freedom and their life is at the mercy of the state except for the communist rulers, their families and friends…
Communism is the violent aspect of Socialism… They are both absolute evil….

mnjg on August 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Can someone provide me a “back door” into the NY Times?

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Try this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=1

New Hampshire residents gave the least share of their income, the Chronicle stated, with 2.5 percent.

Slogans: “NH is for Lovers Tightwads.” “NH: The ‘Screw You’ State.”

BuckeyeSam on August 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Can someone provide me a “back door” into the NY Times?

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM

No, but if you do have to indulge in such risky behavior do wear a condom or 57.

CorporatePiggy on August 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

All you clowns think all the people who voted for McCain in a particular state are all the people who gave money to charity in that state? Ha ha ha okay then.

And gee, why is Utah at the top of the list?
Oh wait – the nanny church demands that its members hand over 10% of their income. Never mind.

All this joke of a comparison shows is that ALL the adults – dem and republican- in the top ten give more money than the people in the bottom ten.

Just counting donations and making conclusions is really stupid.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

It would be nice if people in blue states, who give miserly to charity from their personal funds, would at least voluntarily donate more of their income to the federal government. Since it is they who demand higher taxes to pay for their benevolent giving, they should set a high standard and be an example for the red states on how dedicated to their cause of higher taxes they really are.

While they are at it, these bleeding heart liberals should fuel their homes in the winter with only power generated from wind and the sun. We can use them as a test case on how easy and cost effective it would be to not use fossil fuel.

iamsaved on August 20, 2012 at 3:22 PM
—–
w t f

people who voted for Obama or McCain ≠ all the people who gave to charity

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Pablo Honey on August 20, 2012 at 2:52 PM

“…mega-church”?

Smaller churches don’t count? Or do you consider any ‘evangelical’ church to be “mega”?

Solaratov on August 20, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I can’t remember if it was part of Brook’s study, but I also remember reading that conservatives are more likely to look after a sick or elderly relative, while liberals are more inclined to believe it’s the state’s job to do it for them.

Sharke on August 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Who Really Cares? by Arthur C. Brooks covers this.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 3:36 PM

BuckeyeSam on August 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

.
Worked like a charm. Thanks Buckeye’. : )
Great OpEd.
.
I’m guessing Nicholas D. Kristof is one of those “Paul Newman” type of liberals.

If people are going to be “liberal”, that’s the best kind.

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Can someone provide me a “back door” into the NY Times?

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM

.
No, but if you do have to indulge in such risky behavior do wear a condom or 57.

CorporatePiggy on August 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

.
Okay, FINE . . . . . . . I “asked for it”, I could have worded it better . . . very good.

listens2glenn on August 20, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Smaller churches don’t count? Or do you consider any ‘evangelical’ church to be “mega”?

Solaratov on August 20, 2012 at 3:35 PM

It doesn’t carry the same implication that the money given was simply thrown out the window, and without that implication, there was no actual comment there.

Axe on August 20, 2012 at 3:42 PM

It’s all here:

Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism [Paperback]
Arthur C. Brooks (Author), James Q. Wilson (Foreword)

hepcat on August 20, 2012 at 3:42 PM

All you clowns think all the people who voted for McCain in a particular state are all the people who gave money to charity in that state? Ha ha ha okay then.

And gee, why is Utah at the top of the list?
Oh wait – the nanny church demands that its members hand over 10% of their income. Never mind.

All this joke of a comparison shows is that ALL the adults – dem and republican- in the top ten give more money than the people in the bottom ten.

Just counting donations and making conclusions is really stupid.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

You should read Who Really Care? by Arthur C. Brooks.

These assertions are bourne out. The religious do give more (in terms of money, time and personal sacrifice) than the non-religious; same for conservative vs liberal. The differences are bigger along the religious/non-religious divide.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Of course.

Axion on August 20, 2012 at 3:50 PM

And gee, why is Utah at the top of the list?
Oh wait – the nanny church demands that its members hand over 10% of their income. Never mind.
Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

The LDS Church forces people to pay a tithe?

You are also ignorant of the many humanitarian efforts and programs the LDS Church runs.

Your attitude is another sign of why conservatives distrust government “charity”: the government tends to see anyone elses efforts as illegitimate competition, a misuse of resources.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 3:51 PM

I donate when I can afford it. My family of course comes first, but I have no problems buying those extra items that would make a few meals a week for someone when I can. Even 5-10 dollars at that time can go a long ways.

Of course, I tend to donate hard items all the time… when i say that I mean like food and clothing… I never give cash. We have a food drive where mail carriers come and do pick up at your door when they drop off the mail… mine hates and loves me that day…. hate because he has 10 bags of canned goods to carry to his truck… love me for that same reason.

watertown on August 20, 2012 at 3:57 PM

All this joke of a comparison shows is that ALL the adults – dem and republican- in the top ten give more money than the people in the bottom ten.

Just counting donations and making conclusions is really stupid.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I realize it destroys your entire worldview – but there have been multiple studies showing that conservatives give much much more to charity – both in terms of volunteering and in terms of money – then liberals.

I can understand the anger you are expressing, as your entire worldview revolves around your belief that liberals are caring, compassionate good people and that conservatives are evil, greedy mean people. And studies such as this tend to turn that thinking on its head.

Instead of lashing out because of this study, you should instead spend time challenging your base assumptions and realize that conservatives don’t want smaller gov’t b/c they are mean, evil and hate the poor, but because we genuinely believe that the gov’t – outside of fairly limited duties that a gov’t should do – generally does more harm than good and that a free people will accomplish much more in terms of helping the poor, etc., than gov’t attempting to do the same.

but no, instead you will rationalize all of the studies that all show the same thing – that liberals give very little comparatively to charity than conservatives – and come up with excuses and continue in your belief that conservatives are evil, mean, hate the poor, etc., etc.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 3:57 PM

These assertions are bourne out. The religious do give more (in terms of money, time and personal sacrifice) than the non-religious; same for conservative vs liberal. The differences are bigger along the religious/non-religious divide.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 3:43 PM
——-

ha ha ha so now, Captain Preposterous claims a study that simply ranks the total dollars given to charity also includes time donated and other things donated.

Amazing kool aid you’re drinking.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM

And gee, why is Utah at the top of the list?
Oh wait – the nanny church demands that its members hand over 10% of their income. Never mind.
Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Long after Hurrican Katrina was off the radar and public opinion was paying attention to Barak Obama, church groups were the only ones left coming to the Gulf Coast to lend a hand. Churches from every one of the continental states came, help feed the homeless, help tear out a rotted house, and provided comfort and support to Mississippians. We will never forget their kindness.

Your vapid remark about chuches shows your obvious ignorance. Where no one will go, churches will. While liberal pay their taxes and snobbily believe that’s enough, chuches know that the work of God is in their hands. For them it’s not about the money, its about an investment in their lives that’s important. Those are figures that cannot be calculated, and can only be experienced.

They came for five years, some people using their vacations to come work in the sweltering heat to help us. They didn’t ask for thanks, knowing that in the work they performed their duty as Christians.

Thank you Utah. Thank you Ohio, Tennessee, New York, Pennsylvania, and all our brothers and sisters who came to help us in our time of help. Thank you thank you.

itsspideyman on August 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM

ha ha ha so now, Captain Preposterous claims a study that simply ranks the total dollars given to charity also includes time donated and other things donated.

Amazing kool aid you’re drinking.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM

New studies showing the same thing come out every 6 months or so. Perhaps the studies can be argued with, the metrics discounted, etc.

But why the anger? Assume for a moment that the studies over the last 10 years or so are correct and that conservatives do give more time and money to charity. Would that change your world view? Would that challenge your basic assumptions politically? If not, why so angry about it?

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM

ha ha ha so now, Captain Preposterous claims a study that simply ranks the total dollars given to charity also includes time donated and other things donated.

Amazing kool aid you’re drinking.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Did you read Arthur C. Brook’s book in 20 minutes? You think you are dismissing the argument but you’re not – you’re only deluding yourself.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 4:10 PM

Long after Hurrican Katrina was off the radar and public opinion was paying attention to Barak Obama, church groups were the only ones left coming to the Gulf Coast to lend a hand. Churches from every one of the continental states came, help feed the homeless, help tear out a rotted house, and provided comfort and support to Mississippians. We will never forget their kindness.

Your vapid remark about chuches shows your obvious ignorance. Where no one will go, churches will. While liberal pay their taxes and snobbily believe that’s enough, chuches know that the work of God is in their hands. For them it’s not about the money, its about an investment in their lives that’s important. Those are figures that cannot be calculated, and can only be experienced.

They came for five years, some people using their vacations to come work in the sweltering heat to help us. They didn’t ask for thanks, knowing that in the work they performed their duty as Christians.

Thank you Utah. Thank you Ohio, Tennessee, New York, Pennsylvania, and all our brothers and sisters who came to help us in our time of help. Thank you thank you.

itsspideyman on August 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM
———–
A church that dictates its members hand over 10%? That’s ridiculous.

“While liberal pay their taxes and snobbily believe that’s enough” is a preposterous claim.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM

Liberals are notoriously not generous. Exhibit A: Slow Joe Biden.

bw222 on August 20, 2012 at 4:13 PM

I realize it destroys your entire worldview – but there have been multiple studies showing that conservatives give much much more to charity – both in terms of volunteering and in terms of money – then liberals.

I can understand the anger you are expressing, as your entire worldview revolves around your belief that liberals are caring, compassionate good people and that conservatives are evil, greedy mean people. And studies such as this tend to turn that thinking on its head.

Instead of lashing out because of this study, you should instead spend time challenging your base assumptions and realize that conservatives don’t want smaller gov’t b/c they are mean, evil and hate the poor, but because we genuinely believe that the gov’t – outside of fairly limited duties that a gov’t should do – generally does more harm than good and that a free people will accomplish much more in terms of helping the poor, etc., than gov’t attempting to do the same.

but no, instead you will rationalize all of the studies that all show the same thing – that liberals give very little comparatively to charity than conservatives – and come up with excuses and continue in your belief that conservatives are evil, mean, hate the poor, etc., etc.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 3:57 PM
——–

how can you possibly breathe with all that straw flying around

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:13 PM

A church that dictates its members hand over 10%? That’s ridiculous.

“While liberal pay their taxes and snobbily believe that’s enough” is a preposterous claim.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM

You do know what the word “tithe” means, right?

Mormons also donate a lot of time and goods (e.g., food drives).

Again, studies time and again show that the religious donate more time and money and property etc than the non-religious; same for conservative vs liberal (though conservatives tend to be more religious than liberals so you could argue that religious liberals give more than the non-religious).

You have yet to actually dispute any of this. Just calling it preposterous isn’t an argument. Go read Who Really Cares? before you beclown yourself further.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 4:18 PM

how can you possibly breathe with all that straw flying around

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:13 PM

I’ve read your comments on this site for some time. I have succinctly summarized your world view. If you don’t believe it is your world view, perhaps you should consider editing your writing so as not to create the misperception. Either your writing is terrible and conveys a philosophy and ideas you don’t mean it to, or your believe that all conservatives are evil, cruel and hate the poor.

Either way, it is on you – not me.

As to the remainder, I stand by my point. Why do studies – multiple studies over a period of years – that show that conservatives give more time and money than liberals to charity cause you so much anger?

If it isn’t because it challenges your worldview, then why?

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:19 PM

A church that dictates its members hand over 10%? That’s ridiculous.

“While liberal pay their taxes and snobbily believe that’s enough” is a preposterous claim.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM

Ummm – every Church tends to have recommendations on tithing. Your ignorance of this is noted. Also, the LDS church doesn’t enforce tithing through the IRS or anything – it remains voluntary for the members.

So, what is your point again, if you believe you have one?

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM

“your believe that all conservatives are evil, cruel and hate the poor.”
Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:19 PM
——

hilarious

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM

You have yet to actually dispute any of this. Just calling it preposterous isn’t an argument. Go read Who Really Cares? before you beclown yourself further.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Rywall has never been interested in an honest debate based on reason and facts. He has always been interested in calling conservatives names. Which is why studies showing that liberals, in fact, tend to give less to charity than conservatives is so hurtful to his self-image.

When your entire world-view is based on the belief that conservatives are motivated by hate, greed, ignorance, etc., evidence to the contrary is met with vicious anger and denial.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM

hilarious

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM

Truth is often funnier than fiction.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:24 PM

When your entire world-view is based on the belief that conservatives are motivated by hate, greed, ignorance, etc., evidence to the contrary is met with vicious anger and denial.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM
—–
More straw

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Rywall has never been interested in an honest debate based on reason and facts. He has always been interested in calling conservatives names. Which is why studies showing that liberals, in fact, tend to give less to charity than conservatives is so hurtful to his self-image.

When your entire world-view is based on the belief that conservatives are motivated by hate, greed, ignorance, etc., evidence to the contrary is met with vicious anger and denial.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Good point. Rywall has shown a strong dislike of actually engaging.

For example:

hilarious

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM

It’s hard to argue with someone who’s that evasive and resorts to elementary school debate tactics.

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM

More straw

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM

So make an actual point.

Let me guess on your next post…

Preposterous!
Hilarious!
Straw man!

gwelf on August 20, 2012 at 4:26 PM

More straw

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Just because you call something straw, does not make it so. I know that might surprise you – I have seen you repeatedly make assertions of fact before that were untrue yet you steadfastly stick with them and keep asserting them.

But, it doesn’t really work. Your assertions are not the same as fact. Your historical comments on various threads here at HotAir speak for themselves. If that is not your world view – then again – your writing is pretty terrible b/c that is the worldview your comments convey.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Here is a debate according to Dave Rywall.

You people are stupid. You drink the kool-aid. the study is obviously wrong. You are hilarious and your comments are straw. LDS!!!!!!! Tithing!!!! eleven!!!

That is what he considers an argument. Too funny.

Monkeytoe on August 20, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Conservatives believe in self reliance and also helping their fellow man, personally.

Liberals believe in the almighty government to figure out who needs what and parcel it out.

Turns out that Liberals have the wrong idea about government. It isn’t anyone’s family, friend or neighbor.

But that’s Liberals for you…they get stuck on some wild-ass theory and refuse to change, in spite of anything that would show something contrary to their belief.

Liberals don’t have opinions…they have beliefs, like many religious conservatives have on some topics.

Beliefs are not opinions. Beliefs are very stubborn and often don’t give way to fact, logic or reason.

So Conservatives believe it is their duty to care for their fellow man while Liberals believe it is the group, as the government, that’s supposed to do that.

ProfShadow on August 20, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Obama: You didn’t give that!

Fallon on August 20, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Was just about to post that. Bravo!

Christien on August 20, 2012 at 4:37 PM

Every time the Obots start mewling about Rmoney’s tax returns, his campaign should trot out a comparison of how much more his family has donated to charity than Obama/Biden combined.

Christien on August 20, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Now there should be a study of “blue” states showing who in the blue states is more likely to, or does give to charity or help those in need themselves.

Bet I already know the answer.

Wolfmoon on August 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Not surprising. The leftist mantra is always ‘let government do it’. By the same token, who are the people always claiming that others are RACIST!?

GarandFan on August 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM

More straw

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Donkeys, or more appropriate, asses, eat straw.

Have at it then dave. We’ll compost what comes out the other end because unlike liberals, conservatives actually believe in conservation in deed versus word.

Wolfmoon on August 20, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Utah leads charitable giving, with 10.6 percent of income given.

The Left has been trying to denounce Mitt Romney as a greedy “vampire capitalist”, and others have denounced his Mormon faith as being a “cult”, but the state with the highest Mormon population leads the nation in charity.

Meanwhile Obama won’t give a dime to his own brother in Kenya.

Who is the real greedy vampire in this election?

Steve Z on August 20, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Liberals idea of charity is to force someone else to surrender their property. They have fish hooks in their own pockets.

esblowfeld on August 20, 2012 at 5:23 PM

A church that dictates its members hand over 10%? That’s ridiculous.

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM

No one forces anyone to do anything. If you believe that it’s the right thing to do, you do it. Does the concept of selflessness and charity really spook you that much?

Andrew D on August 20, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Dave Rywall on August 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Some have already pointed out your clueless comment and also noted that churches do plenty of non-monetary humanitarian/service work.

Taking a look at Utah: a big windstorm hit knocking out power for days and causing millions in damage to communities just north of Salt Lake City. Didn’t hear about it?…Maybe it was because the residents, as taught in their churches, organized in their neighborhoods and church groups and took care of the downed trees, fixed their neighbors roofs, shared their homes, etc etc rather than crying on the news for a government “solution”.

batter on August 20, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Comment pages: 1 2