And the Most Generous People in America are: The Poor

[frazzledspice]

Yes, I read Reader's Digest while my car was in the shop....

According to RD, the poor (those earning under $10,000 per year) are the most generous people in America, contributing 5.3% of their incomes to charity.

Average contribution is 2.1% of income.

College graduates do worse than average--2.0%, as do those earning over $100,000--also contributing 2.0%.

This comes as no surprise to me, because my life has been touched many times by the generosity of people who have very little but share what they have.

Should we, as individuals and as a nation, strive to contribute more to charities? Perhaps as much as the poor do?

If the poor can be so generous, why can't the college graduates? Or those earning over $100K a year?

[poseidon]

I'm totally hazarding a guess, and I'm going to ask a question as well. If the poor tend to be more religious than the rich, and the poor are more apt to tithe to their church, would that count?

[mrisch[$]]

Originally posted by frazzledspice
Should we, as individuals and as a nation, strive to contribute more to charities? Perhaps as much as the poor do?

If the poor can be so generous, why can't the college graduates? Or those earning over $100K a year?

Fraz, I was with you until the last thought. While I agree that percentage of income is an appropriate way to look at contributions, I think it is not a direct leap to "others aren't contributing enough". I agree with Jeff that church tithes probably make up a large part of contributions of the poor. That's ok, but it isn't really "charities".

Also, do the math. the $100K earner contributing 2.1% donates $2000 a year. The $10k earner donating 5% donates $500 per year. That means the person appearing to give half as much is actually giving 4 times as much!

Granted, the pain factor is lower because it is a lower percentage of income and there is more spare income. However, it is unfair to imply that those earning more money are not generous or making donations.

[jenninca]

I agree with that theory. The first school I worked at was a private school in a wealthy suburb. When they had a food drive, very little was brought in unless there was some incentive, such as an out-of-uniform pass if you brought in three cans.

This year, my school has about 50% of students on free or reduced lunch. They had a food drive for Christmas and had several classes contributing more than five cans per kid.

(Then there's my class. After a week, they had brought in nothing, no matter how many reminders I gave. Finally, I brought in a bunch of food myself, thinking the visual would jog their memory. Someone stole some of the food I brought in. Finally, someone brought in three cans of spinach. That's all I got the whole time.)

Cindy

[cyndilouwhoo]

But don't forget (this kills me to say this) that the man who contributes the most to charity overall is...ick...Bill Gates.

Some very wealthy people do in fact feel a responsibility to give back to the community--and they have the wherewithal to secure financial planners to help them do it effectively.

Also, Americans from all financial walks of life gave in unprecedented numbers to the September 11 funds set up to help people in need.

But to your question: I will take a guess here and say that more people in the mid and upper income brackets don't give a lot--because they haven't the faintest idea how to manage money and because of that don't have much to give.

Cyndi

Who begs pardon if this is rambling. She just woke up.

[kurt_messick]

Percentages are important, but then so are actual amounts.

But it is something to consider when the person who worries about keeping the lights and heat on in the house gives a dollar, and the person who never has to worry about that gives however much. There is a real sense in which until that second person gives so much that he has to begin to worry about keeping the lights and heat on, he'll never quite understand. This is what Jesus was getting at with the widow's generosity story.

On the other hand, this is sort of like comparing forms of oppression. My hurt is worse than your hurt kind of thing. It rarely works out as a simple calculus that way.

I have been in churches were the median income was well into the six figures, and been in churches with a majority on some form of assistance. While the overall money intake was higher at the former church, it was always like pulling teeth to raise the necessary funds, and those who gave often tended to feel it gave them 'rights' over the church. The latter church always had need of money but never seemed to lack for people trying to raise it and give. The people there rarely tried to exert 'ownership' after raising the funds.

I consider my taxes to be a form of charity... otherwise, legions of poor, stupid people wouldn't have jobs in government and "essential services" where they can screw off all day and frustrate me into finding some supervisor or manager that has half a brain left from dealing with these nitwits.

Same goes for the warranty portion of any product I purchase... "support" personnel would be on the streets with carboard signs if it weren't for their inability to do anything but read all those "how to fix it" notices companies hide from the public with regard to the flaws and workarounds in their badly-designed products.

[cristina1]

I'm just wondering where RD came up with these figures. (I am always leary of the current findings without knowing the source of the study.)

[poseidon]

I agree with Jeff that church tithes probably make up a large part of contributions of the poor. That's ok, but it isn't really "charities".

I guess that would depend on how involved your church is in the community. Our church does a ton of very charitable work in Denver, Israel, the Sudan, etc. that isn't religious-based. Those charitable acts are funded for the most part by tithes from the congregation.

[pluckyduck]

Originally posted by poseidon


I guess that would depend on how involved your church is in the community. Our church does a ton of very charitable work in Denver, Israel, the Sudan, etc. that isn't religious-based. Those charitable acts are funded for the most part by tithes from the congregation.

Also, in a denominations, churches with more money sponsor churches with less money... and all of the churches and synogogues that I'm aware of have social programs. If you cut the Jim and Tammy Faye Baakers out of the picture, I can't think of a reason that religious donations wouldn't be the same as any other kind of charity, a mixed bag of results to dollars given.

Andrea

[mrisch[$]]

I didn't mean to imply that churches don't do charitable work or get involved as charities. What I meant was this:

The original post was talking about why the rich don't give to "charities", and I was saying wait - when you make $10K a year and $500 of that goes to a church, it is likely that for someone making $100K giving $2000 a year, then $500 goes to church, and the other $1500 goes to a non-worship based charity.

[Cynon]

Originally posted by frazzledspice
If the poor can be so generous, why can't the college graduates? Or those earning over $100K a year?

I agree with completely that we all should contribute more, especially those of us how live in wealthy countries. But as a university student I can understand why students don't contribute much while in school or after the first 5-20 years after graduating (depending how much a person is in debt). The reason why I say this is because most current students or recent graduates have -35,000 to -200,000 dollars in debt (if not more) after they graduate, and although many of us would like to donate, we really don't have any extra funds since all our extra money is either taken by the banks or goverment, during a time when we don't have the benefit of having a high paying job because of lack of job experence (of course this excludes those who make 100k their first year out of university, but unfortunatly that does not account for a high percentage of people who graduate from university, who are working at minimum wage jobs). So for my fellow mac and chess 3 times a day eating students who strugle to get the water bill payed each month, I say I'm sorry we can't contribute more than 2%, but with a little time we hope we can contributing more. Or at least I will be.



Cynon

[frazzledspice]

Fr. Kurt said, "But it is something to consider when the person who worries about keeping the lights and heat on in the house gives a dollar, and the person who never has to worry about that gives however much. There is a real sense in which until that second person gives so much that he has to begin to worry about keeping the lights and heat on, he'll never quite understand. This is what Jesus was getting at with the widow's generosity story."
____________________________________________________

Fr. Kurt, you are so wise.

When my church in St. Louis had a fundraising campaign to build a school, one of the parishioners donated $75,000. He was the CIO of Southwestern Bell.

Our jaws dropped, but, in truth, it was probably just appreciated stock that he never paid a penny for.

Or let's say he had purchased 2500 shares at $10. If he sold them at $30, you'd have $75,000. He would have paid $25,000 for those stocks, and, after taking the $75,000 charitable tax deduction, would have saved himself perhaps $30,000 in taxes. The $75,000 donation would have given him a $5,000 credit.

Or people who give gift annuities to churches as seniors....they are getting as much as 16% a year on these annuities, depending on their age at the time the irrevocable gift is made.

Every dollar contributed by the poor is contributed as a result of their blood, sweat, and tears. No appreciated stock, gift annuities, life insurance bequests, etc.

[mrisch[$]]

I don't get the point. The SWBell guy has an extra $75K to give, even if it was "free" money (nevermind that he actually worked for it, even if he was overcompensated) and rather than:
1. Play golf
2. Buy a jet
3. Buy a bigger house
4. Spend it on Cocaine
5. Give it to his children

He donates it to the church; and somehow he is not as generous as the poor person who donates a dollar because it doesn't hurt? Would you rather that he not give the money? Would you rather the church take a pound of flesh as well, so he really feels it? Would you rather that those seniors with annuities give it to their grandchildren instead?

Don't get me wrong - I grew up with money, and I grew up with a mother who gave to those with even less than us despite how little she had. I just bristle at some sort of comparison that because those with more don't hurt as much by giving, they somehow have lesser intentions.

The guy from SWBell gave money to get to the goal, and he probably gave more to other organizations. It is the result that counts here. I am quite sure the church did not question his pain when accepting the check.

[poseidon]

Michael,

I was actually going to bring up that same point. I was trying to figure out how to put it into words. I think you did it just fine.

Yes, a "poor" person giving up $500 has probably made more of a sacrifice than a "rich" person giving up $5000.

Look at it this way, Fraz.

Christians (I won't speak for Catholics because I'm not) are commanded to tithe 10% of their earnings.

A "poor" person who earns $15,000 per year after "rendering unto Caeser what is Caeser's" (pays his taxes) tithes $1500 to a charity of his choice (let's say for fun it's his church).

A "rich" person who earns $100,000 per year after "rendering unto Caeser what is Caeser's" tithes $10,000 to the charity of his choice (again, his church).

Both are following God's commandment for tithing. Why bemoan the fact that the "rich" person hasn't given enough? Would you be happier if the "rich" man gave up $86,500 so that in the end, both of these men are in the same place on the economic scale?

So long as the money earned isn't earned by ill-gotten gains, I don't think the church or anyone else should be judging the amount of the tithe, nor trying to discern the reasons behind the tithe.

My church doesn't always get 10% out of me, as much as I love and respect my church. Sometimes, the money is given elsewhere when a need is demonstrated that I want to contribute to.