Why the rich don’t give to charity
One of the most surprising, and perhaps confounding, facts of charity in America is that the people who can least afford to give are the ones who donate the greatest percentage of their income. In 2011, the wealthiest Americans—those with earnings in the top 20 percent—contributed on average 1.3 percent of their income to charity. By comparison, Americans at the base of the income pyramid—those in the bottom 20 percent—donated 3.2 percent of their income. The relative generosity of lower-income Americans is accentuated by the fact that, unlike middle-class and wealthy donors, most of them cannot take advantage of the charitable tax deduction, because they do not itemize deductions on their income-tax returns.
But why? Lower-income Americans are presumably no more intrinsically generous (or “prosocial,” as the sociologists say) than anyone else. However, some experts have speculated that the wealthy may be less generous—that the personal drive to accumulate wealth may be inconsistent with the idea of communal support. Last year, Paul Piff, a psychologist at UC Berkeley, published research that correlated wealth with an increase in unethical behavior: “While having money doesn’t necessarily make anybody anything,” Piff later told New York magazine, “the rich are way more likely to prioritize their own self-interests above the interests of other people.” They are, he continued, “more likely to exhibit characteristics that we would stereotypically associate with, say, assholes.” Colorful statements aside, Piff’s research on the giving habits of different social classes—while not directly refuting the asshole theory—suggests that other, more complex factors are at work. In a series of controlled experiments, lower-income people and people who identified themselves as being on a relatively low social rung were consistently more generous with limited goods than upper-class participants were. Notably, though, when both groups were exposed to a sympathy-eliciting video on child poverty, the compassion of the wealthier group began to rise, and the groups’ willingness to help others became almost identical.









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
Pish and tosh.
Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 22, 2013 at 7:04 PM
Rich people are stingy, that’s why there are all those hospital wings named after the donors.
vityas on March 22, 2013 at 7:08 PM
A huge part of lower income charity goes to churches.
Realist on March 22, 2013 at 7:08 PM
Such noblesse.
I bet they didn’t look to check if the most wealthy who didn’t give were liberals.
Seems to me that some wealthy conservatives contribute quite a bit!
We down on the lower rungs know what it is like to need food or a warm coat or a pr of shoes, we know who needs what and do give generously.
Liberals. Not. So. Much.
Scrumpy on March 22, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Nonsense. I’ve known many millionaires who give to charity anonymously with the strong feeling that if they made it known it would be seen as something besides charitable giving.
The mother of one of my best friends of my childhood years was from a billionaire family. She spent much of her time in those days volunteering at disabled veterans nursing homes and last I heard she volunteered for years helping Mother Teresa’s mission in India… and she wasn’t even Catholic.
As my late father used to say.. Ken Stern is guilty of “conspiracy to commit sociology.”
viking01 on March 22, 2013 at 7:13 PM
It is rich LIBERALS that don’t give to charity. Just as Al Gore and Joe Biden.
Warner Todd Huston on March 22, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Let the stereotypes commence. And couldn’t you have used the word “jerk” instead?
John the Libertarian on March 22, 2013 at 7:13 PM
I think rich people are of the mindset, well most rich people, that you give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. With this in mind, creating jobs are what lift people out of poverty, and rich people create businesses that people can work at full time.
Handing out money to people, and handing out money to charities that hand out money to people is counterproductive. Too often, the money people donate to charities goes towards paying the salaries of the people who run these charities, goes towards being siphoned off to cheats and thieves, goes toward running the charity in the first place.
IMO
SauerKraut537 on March 22, 2013 at 7:15 PM
so are their taxes charity or not? this is all sooo confusing.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 7:16 PM
Rich liberals give away other people’s money. They think that counts.
Ronnie on March 22, 2013 at 7:18 PM
How about a graph showing the % of income going to government compared to the % of income going to charity? Giving to government is essentially giving to charity – an extremely poorly run charity. Once the government sucks all of that money out of the higher earners, they have less moral incentive to give to real charity, don’t you think?
besser tot als rot on March 22, 2013 at 7:19 PM
IDK, because they are paying so much in damn taxes that they probably want to keep what ever is left..
melle1228 on March 22, 2013 at 7:21 PM
Compassion aside, I believe 1.2% of $340,000 ($4,800) is more useful than 3.2% of $34,000 ($1,088).
They may be stingier by percentage but they’re more generous by whole dollar amount.
If I’m looking for someone with a heart of gold, I’ll look to the widow for her mite. For cold hard cash to meet the aims of my charity, I’ll hit up the wealthy.
JadeNYU on March 22, 2013 at 7:22 PM
No need for the IMO. You’re spot on.
If someone takes risks and provides jobs and benefits for 500 people they have done far more than the guy who gave away 300 dollars of his 10,000 dollar in annual earnings.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 7:23 PM
While this could be true today it’s not true of everyone.
I have a close friend who is quite, lets say, financially secure.
He got audited a few years ago and the IRS agent could not believe how much he gave to charity. The man makes millions yearly. It was actually his charitable contributions that sparked the audit. And this is who he is. He gives money to charities all over the world as well as to his local church. He lives modestly too, by the way.
Oh, and he is a die hard conservative.
I read some time back that historically, rich Americans gave a lot to charities. It would not surprise me though if this has changed over the years.
JC Penny gave more than 50% of his income to charities. It might have even been higher. I know it was quite a bit but I don’t remember the percentage right now. Something else I learned about JC Penny… they refused to sell any items on credit. Mr Penny felt credit “was folly” and they had that slogan in their catalogs.
How times have changed.
JellyToast on March 22, 2013 at 7:23 PM
I guess it’s not charity as it is begotten essentially by force.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 7:25 PM
They create the jobs that allow the rest of the country to be so darn generous.
Ronnie on March 22, 2013 at 7:25 PM
Thanks, I thought so too, that’s why I said it…
SauerKraut537 on March 22, 2013 at 7:26 PM
I like how your evidence is… “Seems to me…”. It’s so solid. At least I can give very significant anecdotes like Gates and Buffet who are extremely wealthy, liberal and give away almost everything.
lester on March 22, 2013 at 7:27 PM
I gotta be honest.
If I made or had that kind of money, it would be hard for me to get bent out of shape donating to charity.
If the government is going to take so much of my money and hand it out, why should I volenteer more? Isn’t that what the Left is always saying?
Anyway, it’s rich LIBERALS who are the ones with the problem with charitable giving – many of them giving you the same justification I just did.
catmman on March 22, 2013 at 7:27 PM
Conservatives in general tend to give more in charitable giving there is nothing “seems” about it.. Arthur Brooks wrote a whole book about it(Who Really Cares). He was quite surprised believing the stereotype that liberals were more generous. He found that liberals felt they paid taxes and that was their “charity.”
melle1228 on March 22, 2013 at 7:32 PM
I see. Not giving what’s left from the theft of my money to the useless makes me an asshole? So. Be. It!
OldEnglish on March 22, 2013 at 7:32 PM
Romney gave $4 million to charity in 2011.
How much will Paul Piff give in his entire lifetime?
mudskipper on March 22, 2013 at 7:35 PM
I see. Not wanting to give what’s left of my money after the theft makes me an a$$hole? So. Be. It!
OldEnglish on March 22, 2013 at 7:36 PM
How are they still billionaires if they “give away almost everything”?
Moron.
mudskipper on March 22, 2013 at 7:38 PM
Because they’re being robbed blind by taxes to pay for Shawneque’s WIC program, which she abuses, and her three children by as many fathers who will all grow up to terrorize the community until they’re shot by a cop or armed citizen or thrown in jail for a serious sentence.
I would find it pretty d@mn hard to be charitable if I were truly rich. Scrooge was a whiny toad; his tax burden wasn’t even close.
MelonCollie on March 22, 2013 at 7:39 PM
Okay, what nurse left the asylum gate open allowing Losester to escape?
viking01 on March 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM
The same one who let mo-lester have computer access.
He’s worse than libfree, who occasionally says something sensible.
MelonCollie on March 22, 2013 at 7:42 PM
Libs don’t. Conservatives do.
Dems think gubmint is their charity, because they can use gubmint to take some people’s money to line other people’s pockets.
When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you’ll always get Paul’s vote.
petefrt on March 22, 2013 at 7:43 PM
how many of those stingy rich people are dems…
cmsinaz on March 22, 2013 at 7:47 PM
+1
refer to biden
cmsinaz on March 22, 2013 at 7:48 PM
So you are providing some evidence that rich people do give away a lot of money. Hmmm. Thanks .
You once again prove yourself one of the 5 dumbest posters. Embarrassing. Public screwel has failed you.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 8:03 PM
Lester defines dumb.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 8:03 PM
And how many of the uber-wealthy create charitable trusts that go on for years after they have passed on?
trigon on March 22, 2013 at 8:06 PM
Buffet gave away $30 billion in 2006, largest single donation in history. The thing about liberals generally is that we have brains and still manage to make more money to give away more. I can understand this concept of a having a brain is perplexing to you as a conservative.
Can’t even extend the above to CW. He’s so out there I doubt he has a head, let alone a brain.
lester on March 22, 2013 at 8:10 PM
Your stupidity continues.
You act as though he gave away 30 billion in one chuck. You’re so ignorant.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 8:15 PM
Yep top 5 dumbest.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 8:15 PM
Ah, the canard of the percentage of income…when giving ‘less’ means giving thousands more dollars.
Stupid methodology the likes of the ‘pay your fair share’ idiocy.
James on March 22, 2013 at 8:15 PM
Buffett is worth 50 billion plus.
How is giving 5% a year of stock giving ” away almost everything “?
Even if you go with 30 billion…no not almost everything. If he wasn’t a liberal Lester would be telling about how still filthy rich and evil he was.
The fact is that Conservatives give more to charity. The hard truth.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 8:23 PM
Poor lester. Dude, keep the thoughts to yourself. You’ll be less exposed.
They wouldn’t be rich, if they’d give most all away.
It’s their money and they don’t need to advertise what they give. Only dummies propagandize about it.
Real givers just give, help, preferreably anonymously.
How much do the Obamas give away, percetage-wise?
Schadenfreude on March 22, 2013 at 8:27 PM
This is the same stupid “percentage” methodology the leftist hacks use to claim Obama spends less than other Presidents….They change the meaning of words and use absurd accounting shenanigans and a sh*tload of simpletons believe it….it’s frightening…
Tim Zank on March 22, 2013 at 8:29 PM
.
I immediately visualized Bill Gates. Couldn’t help it. Picture just jumped into my head.
ExpressoBold on March 22, 2013 at 8:38 PM
Warren “le Buffet” Buffett pledged $30 billion to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2006. They still have that money cause neither Warren nor Bill can bear to part with it.
ExpressoBold on March 22, 2013 at 8:44 PM
I am sure it has nothing at all to do with half their money being stolen to fund 70% of the government…
astonerii on March 22, 2013 at 8:45 PM
.
I immediately visualized Bill Gates. Couldn’t help it. Picture just jumped into my head.
.
It’s a shame one has to change a quoted excerpt to get it into the comment.
ExpressoBold on March 22, 2013 at 8:47 PM
Could it be that the rich believe in earnings, and charities always seem to be run by lefties….who have increasingly, since 2008, been carping non-stop about how horrible productive people are?
cthulhu on March 22, 2013 at 9:05 PM
All I know is that just about any reader at HotAir gave more to charity in 2007 than Obama and Biden. Once they started running for national office and got criticized for stinginess, Obama got more generous. Biden still mainly gives very bad advice.
theCork on March 22, 2013 at 9:13 PM
Sounds like a perfect description of both Biden and Algore. I believe their charitable contributions have been on the order of the low thousand dollar amounts per year despite income in the millions.
AZfederalist on March 22, 2013 at 9:27 PM
Lester gives squat but is quick to hook his train to Buffet.
CW on March 22, 2013 at 9:36 PM
And spends our money: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/bidens-one-night-paris-hotel-tab-58500050_708799.html
davidk on March 22, 2013 at 9:40 PM