's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

Something to think about...(11 posts)

Something to think about...ClydeTri
Apr 28, 2003 6:56 AM
Below is pasted from Neil Boortz's webpage..the study is also mentioned on the front home page of USATODAY, so it must be a legit it is..

Some group called The Chronicle of Philanthropy has compiled a list of the most and least generous areas in the United States when it comes to individuals giving money to charity.

This list of the most and least generous cities in the U.S. shows the amount of disposable income that is donated to charitable causes. Look at the list, and tell me if you see anything odd . politically speaking . about who does and doesn't give.

Most Generous/Percentage
1. Salt Lake City-Ogden, Utah 14.9
2. Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, Michigan 10.0
3. (tie) Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota 8.5
3. (tie) Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, North Carolina 8.5
5. (tie) Memphis, Tennessee 8.4
5. (tie) Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas 8.4 7. Nashville, Tennessee 8.3
8. (tie) San Antonio, Texas 8.1
8. (tie) Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas 8.1
10. (tie) Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 8.0
10. (tie) Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, Virginia 8.0

Least Generous/Percentage
1. Hartford, Connecticut 4.7
2. Providence-Fall River-Warwick, Rhode Island 5.1
3. Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, Massachusetts 5.2
4. Buffalo-Niagara Falls, New York 5.8
5. (tie) New Orleans, Louisiana 5.9
5. (tie) Las Vegas, Nevada 5.9
7. Austin-San Marcos, Texas 6.0
8. (tie) Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 6.1
8. (tie) Miami-Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 6.1
8. (tie) Philadelphia-Wilmington, Delaware-Atlantic City, New Jersey 6.1

Have you figured it out yet? Let me help. Remember the great election map after the 2000 vote? The reds and the blues? If not, your link to that map is The red areas on that map voted for George Bush. The blue areas voted for Al Gore. Check out the cities where people give generously to charities. For the most part, they voted for Bush. The least generous cities voted for Gore. In fact, you might remember a news story during the campaign showing how little money Al Gore gave to charity. Stories of that type are now surfacing about John Kerry.

The true story here is one of the nature of leftist compassion. When conservatives act compassionately, they do so with their own money. Liberals? They use your money..
here's what I thinkmohair_chair
Apr 28, 2003 7:44 AM
Could it be that this has nothing to do with political leanings? Can you imagine that?

I look at this list and I think, hmmm, Salt Lake City, home of many Mormons, who traditionally give 10% of their income to the church (which counts as a charity).

Then I look down the list and wonder what the hell Michigan and Minnesota are doing there, but the rest of the list is basically Southern or Midwestern places where participation in religion is strong, and therefore, so is contributing to the church (which counts as a charity).

I also look at these towns and think, housing prices are typically low and the standard of living is generally low compared to (here comes the punchline) the places on the second list, the least generous. It seems that if you have less money available to give because things cost more, you are less likely to give it away.

But that's just my crazy mind working. It's probably all about politics and those bastard left wing commie pinkos.
Grand Rapids/Holland, Michigan = DutchKristin
Apr 28, 2003 7:55 AM
1. Salt Lake City-Ogden, Utah 14.9
I agree with Mohair... The Mormon church

2. Grand Rapids-Muskegon-Holland, Michigan 10.0
Heavily Dutch. Old-school, stringent legalism. 10% given. (Also there is a very large church in Grand Rapids.)

1. Hartford, Connecticut 4.7
Insurance companies have a history of low charitable contributions and of taking advantage of their employees. This one doesn't surprise me at all. Hartford, CT = Insurance. I worked there.

Given the Willow Creek in in the Chicago burbs, I'm kinda surprised that it didn't show up. Probably has to do with per cappita of church goers to non-church goers and the fact that tithing isn't encouraged in this area like it is in others.
Arent the northern cities ....ClydeTri
Apr 28, 2003 7:59 AM
Dont the northern cities in general have much larger Catholic population than southern? We have a very small Catholic population here..and excuse my ignorance, but dont Catholics give 10% almost automatically?
Apr 28, 2003 8:05 AM
I don't know. I grew up in Groton, CT where very few people went to church at all; and if you did, you were probably protestant--though I think there are some Catholics in Rhode Island. When I moved to Chicago I was amazed by all the Catholics. Honestly, I thought they were all over in Italy and belonged to the Mafia. Here, my experience has been that only a small portion of people who would call themselves Catholic are devout. Most just go to mass a couple times a month and don't give much or any money. I'm sure it varies from place to place.
Catholic tithingPaulCL
Apr 28, 2003 9:46 AM
Having grown up Catholic, I might be able to shed some light on this one. Here depends.

My family NEVER tithed. My parents did not believe in giving a fixed percentage to the church blindly. They gave to charities, but not necessarilly the church. I think they were put off about how incrdibly wealthy the Catholic church is and the fact that it does not share that wealth. The Catholic church is the largest non-governmental landowner in the USA and they NEVER sell anything.

Now, in fairness...strict, hardcore Catholics do give a fixed 10% to the church. I have been publicly chastised by a strict Catholic over this point, so its' stuck in my mind. Funny though, I marry a Methodist who's parents give 10% off the top too....It's been a point of conflict in our marriage.

Another note on Catholic tithing...I know several friends and family members who have stopped giving to the church. They are upset over the churchs' handling of the priest molestation situation. My mother (who gives, but not tithes) refuses to give'm another dime. Makes sense to me. But I'm sure the church has lost a lot of contributions and members over the last several years.
Apr 28, 2003 8:02 AM
Cost of living in most cities is very high compared to more rural areas, including taxes. Less money left over for charity.

Republicans tend to have more, so they have more to give, too.

I would bet that most of it is religious giving, though, but remember that churches provide a lot of community services with that money.

Yes. Community Service from churches is hugeKristin
Apr 28, 2003 8:12 AM
Churches offer free help to people. And in addition to the money they collect, many of thier members also donate several hours a month to serving. One of the things I did at Willow was to provide financial planning advice to people with negative cash flow who were seeking help from the church. We did a lot more than benevolant giving. We offer them some money or food panty if its necessary; but more importantly, we taught them how to build a budget, track spending, negotiate with creditors, etc...
Catholic Charities very largeDougSloan
Apr 28, 2003 10:20 AM
Yes but,TJeanloz
Apr 28, 2003 10:32 AM
Catholic Charities is very large, but it is also quasi-independent of the Church. It has its own board of directors who ultimately answer to the Pope, but it isn't controlled at the diocese level, much to the chagrin of our local bishops.
maybe that the LDS is really getting rich (nm)ColnagoFE
Apr 28, 2003 8:11 AM