Studies that claim "Conservatives give more to charity"...

[concreteblue]

Has anyone ever looked at the methodology of the studies that claim conservatives give more to charity? I find it hard to believe. If i had time I would look at how "charity" is classified by the study, and I am sure that conservatives have give tons to "Charities" that are nothing more than RW support/propaganda orgs...just wondering. Wish someone would look into it...

[Statistical]

1. Most ultra rich tend to be conservative.

So the ultra rich giving 1% to charity in nominal terms would be more than working class family giving 10% of their income.

[Hello_Kitty]

2. I think a lot of it is to their megachurches

Every penny they donate to the monstrosities that goes toward retopping the basketball court or a new roof for the auditorium counts as "charity". Even if the church doesn't spend a penny on the poor in its community.

[salin]

6. I believe I read that church donations were included in the numbers

and there are many charitable religious organizations, however it does also include giving towards the things that you list.

[GSLevel9]

16. ding-ding-ding... we have a WINNER!!! nt

[Zebedeo]

18. Even excluding giving to churches and other religious causes,

conservatives give more money, as a percentage of their income, than liberals. Also they give more blood and more volunteer time.

NYTimes

It is a shame, but it is true.

[Hello_Kitty]

21. The people protesting abortion clinics consider it volunteer work

As do the ones going door to door campaigning against LGBT rights. And the ones sending Bibles (instead of money or supplies) to disaster victims. Volunteering doesn't necessarily mean you're doing anything worthwhile.

Furthermore, as a liberal I think a strong government safety net is much more important than charities. People who need help shouldn't have to grovel before control freaks with money.

[Zebedeo]

31. and liberals give disproportionately to elite private universities,

museums, and symphony orchestras. And that is counted as charitable giving, even though it does little or nothing for the needy among us.

I think it is an embarassment that liberals are personally stingy while being generous with other people's money. It is a disgrace, really. And I say that as a proud Democrat.

Like Mr. Brooks, I wish it were otherwise, but it isn't. We have to face facts and not try to hide from them.

Some self-reflection is in order, IMHO.

[Hello_Kitty]

36. Plenty of conservatives give to colleges too. Really.

Practically every B school in the country is named after some conservative corporate titan. Gotta make sure those MBAs are getting indoctrinated into the Full Milton Friedman Gospel. 'Course you never hear too much about that amongst all the screaming about "librul academia". How about those groups that donate Ayn Rand novels by the truckload to colleges?

Conservatives also donate to the arts.

[Hamlette]

32. Part of it is, I don't believe in charity

not in that way. I believe in the government providing the safety net. I feel guilty giving to some charities because I think "the government is being let off the hook by this."

Having said that, I have three favorite charities (legal services, food bank, and planned parenthood) that I do support.

[Hello_Kitty]

37. I feel the same way.

The DUer is using typical RW talking points about Democrats "wanting to spend other people's money" on social programs. Um, yeah, that's the whole point. The problem with philanthropy is that it's a totally free market system. It's more of a popularity contest than an effective means to get resources where needed. Certain causes are going to attract more money than others even though the less cuddly issues have a much more pressing need and are a bigger threat to the community, i.e. homeless puppies and kitties vs. homeless meth addicts.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

40. Where is the "Google study" Mr. Kristof, in that OPINION COLUMN, says corroborates this?

He doesn't link to it. He doesn't give any pointer to find it. I find this odd.

[liberal N proud]

3. Yes and no?

"while the rich do give more in overall dollars, according to the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, people at the lower end of the income scale give almost 30 percent more of their income."

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=2

[Crazy Dave]

4. Lower income people give a greater percentage of their income ratio-wise

Nobody is perfect and if they feel they are doing the right thing with their own money versus using money that we are forced to pay in taxes then I don't have much of a problem who they give their money too and it's really none of my business.

[rfranklin]

5. But we are forced to pay for the tax cuts and charity write offs...

enjoyed by the rich. Our Social Security payments have been subsidizing tax cuts for the wealthy since Reagan jacked up the withholding in the 1980's.

Plus, the uberwealthy get to shelter their fortunes in various tax exempt foundations that only have to spend 5% of their assets each year on their charitable mission which very often is a something stupid like saving retired polo ponies.

[Crazy Dave]

9. The OP was stating that conservatives donate more, didn't specify them as wealthy

It is not a given that all conservatives are wealthy. There are also millions of conservatives standing in the unemployment lines right now too.

My point is I do with my money as I choose to do and it's nobody's business unless they help me earn it therefore I have no problem and it's none of my business what a working class conservative does with his take home pay either.

[Fumesucker]

Eh, a *real* conservative wouldn't be standing in an unemployment line..

They would be busy pulling themselves up to the ionosphere by their own bootstraps.

[Fumesucker]

14. Dupe.. Self delete..

[rfranklin]

29. But there you are, "take home pay" is something that they are angry about...

and they want society to depend on handouts rather than government programs financed by their taxes.

[lpbk2713]

7. Do you have a credible link?

By credible I mean a source other that Fox, Rasmussen or any of the RW Media Hatemongers.

If not the discussion would cancel itself out and need not go any further.

[Zebedeo]

19. NYTimes

NYTimes

[Cheap_Trick]

8. Maybe they DO give more...

makes for a good tax write off...AND makes them look like they care.

[MrMickeysMom]

10. I haven't seen the data, but I'd be looking for "proportionally"...

... if I looked for anything at all.

Jesus was reported to have acknowledged proportional giving, I believe.

[WinkyDink]

11. And what are the "charities"?

[Hello_Kitty]

30. The Eagle Forum, Crisis pregnancy centers, American Family Association, 700 Club etc. eom

[DearAbby]

12. I have never been required to disclose my political beliefs

when writing a check to any charity. I have no idea how they can determine which party gives more.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Something old that might be useful

http://blueworksbetter.com/CharitableGiving

[kctim]

15. Why would you find it hard to believe?

[fascisthunter]

23. lol... seriously? You need to ask?

[kctim]

25. Yes I need to ask

Partisan stereotypes do not work with me. The majority of conservatives are not rich and almost every conservative I have ever known has been very charitable.

People should not be looked down upon simply because they believe direct charity is more effective than indirect charity.

[jwirr]

17. Their definition of charity is very broad. They give only to their own.

[EC]

20. It turns out that they just brag about it more

they give to the church and charities for tax exemptions. I've never took a write off for any giving, therefore there is no record. I also don't belong to a church, therefore no record.


On Edit: There is also the differences in thinking. Repubs believe charities should take care of all the problems of the safety net i.e. make the poor beg or sit through sermons. Libs believe there should be some amount of dignity (by allowing funds to be gotten without highlighting to the world their plight)and believe the government should provide saftety nets.

[fascisthunter]

22. tax breaks?

[Hello_Kitty]

24. In 2008 the Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix gave $100K to Prop 102

Prop 102 was AZ's equivalent to Prop 8. Somehow an organization with a mission to "save unborn babies" found it necessary to make a contribution toward stopping gays from marrying. They had $100K laying around to put to that purpose.

[upi402]

26. That's what a RW "charity" often is

Just a front for a conservative or religious agenda.

[kath]

27. Wow, that's schocking. Is it legal for them to do that - a "charity" giving money to a

political issue campaign?? Jeebus.

[Hello_Kitty]

28. Perfectly legal since it was to influence voting on a ballot measure.

It didn't go to a candidate.

[Johonny]

33. I think the answer is no

I've seen claims in OP EDs to these studies. I've never really seen a peer reviewed study that you could track the methodology. An Op Ed writer talking about a Google study isn't probably definitive in most peoples minds.

[B Calm]

34. The top 1% have 90% of the wealth. Hell yes they should give more!!

[Zebedeo]

38. IIRC, the Brooks study controlled for income level

and the results were that, for any given income level, the conservatives within that group gave a higher percentage of their income to charity.

So you can't chalk it up to the idea that conservatives have more money.

[Hello_Kitty]

43. And it supposedly controlled for all religious and conservative advocacy giving.

Right.

[fishwax]

47. perhaps, though his methodology in doing so may have been flawed

http://volokh.com/posts/1164012942.shtml

"I am skeptical of basing so much on the SCCBS, in large part because it reports that liberal families make more money than conservatives (it is not clear from Brooks’s book whether the survey is of a representative national sample). In the 2000, 2002, and 2004 General Social Surveys, which are representative samples of the US, conservative families make $2,500 to $5,600 a year more than liberal families in each one. Although I don’t have the ANES data handy, my recollection is that the economic differences between conservatives and liberals are usually in the same direction and even larger in the ANES than in the GSS."

[Hannah Bell]

35. "charity" = church

[misanthrope]

39. I given thought to this over the years...

...having first come across this meme some time back. In the end, I realize I can only go by what I witness from those around me.

Of the conservatives I know who sign checks over to charities, all of them do so with careful record-keeping of their donations and the attendant tax exemptions. I also wonder if everyone who gives makes sure to keep such meticulous track of their altruism. I've stuffed plenty of money into Salvation Army kettles or buckets at roadblocks and at retail counters without ever so much as considering retrieving a record of that. Sure, it might not add up to what Daddy Warbucks is sending off via his accountant, but how much do little things like that add from all the others out there like me?

The conservatives I know who give time to charity through donations of time do so via organizations like their churches or the Junior League. There's an amount of visibility inherent to their actions. The busloads of folks seen piling out at Habitat for Humanity sites or manning the chow lines at soup kitchens, their help is valuable and a good deal of the elbow grease that makes keeps these efforts afloat.

Still I have to wonder, how eager would all those Junior Leaguers be to chip in without the cachet of their organization and the chance to impress their social peers? Would they go on their own to a homeless shelter without Muffy and Buffy there with them to make sure everyone knows?

And the church folks, they gain standing in their churches by involvement with these projects. Without that, would they do it? And what of the supernatural threat/reward aspect of their belief system? What role does that play in their actions?

I've also observed that many of the same conservatives I've witnessed take part in the aforementioned "giving" never hesitate to display some terrible attitudes toward their fellow humans when they think the world at large won't hear. The ugliness, racism and elitism they display at so many other times in their lives seems to show me that their charitable actions come with caveats. Those everyday actions and attitudes aren't isolated either. They get passed on to the children and friends who observe more than these people realize and become drops that add to a flood that inundates our world with callousness and inequity and prejudice.

Maybe questioning their motivations reveals more about my own shortcomings rather than theirs. To the person who gets a hot meal because of their actions or has a roof over their head, the motivations don't matter, only the results. But what of the things they do that they don't consider, the day-to-day interactions that I see hurting others. What does that count for?

[snot]

49. Maybe conservatives have more one-income households, meaning there's

a happily unemployed adult with time to spare for volunteer efforts?

[Imajika]

41. Yes, some studies do show that conservatives are more charitable...

There have been several studies to this effect and a fairly comprehensive article about it in the NY Times linked in this thread.

I think that it is just a matter of liberals wanting to give collectively through government via taxation, where conservatives would rather do so on an individual/church basis.

Once you view it this way, it makes more sense that liberals tend to be for higher taxes (with which they expect their money to help people), where conservatives want lower taxes and less government assistance for people. In effect, liberals wish to pool their money to help large segments of society, while Republicans would rather target individual/church contributions to specific causes.

Still, the notion some here have that conservatives are cheap skates and don't want to help people just isn't true. While horribly political misguided, many conservatives are extremely charitable.

[Johonny]

42. I agree

Ask any Republican fund raiser and you'll find Republicans tend to hand money over. I always found it odd people so tight fisted about paying taxes will gladly hand out lots of money to rather odd Republican fund raising efforts.

[pottersvilleusa]

44. Well their policies create more need for charity

After all...

[Scruffy1]

45. In reality most goes to local things

For instance David Koch's opera donations and things that improve their own neighborhoods and cultural centers. Very little to poor people. I've seem some pretty good studies on this but don't have time to find the links.

[fishwax]

46. here's a brief critique of the Brooks book

In short, Brooks's claim that even when you adjust for secular giving, conservatives give a higher percentage of their income is, according to this writer, suspect: http://volokh.com/posts/1164012942.shtml

The "generosity index" is simply absurd, and I think a link above addresses that.

[ClassWarrior]

48. I've never heard of such nonsense. And why is your profile disabled?

:shrug:

NGU.

[spanone]

50. never heard that and don't believe a word of it....how bout some links