Who Gives More to Charity? Liberals or Conservatives

[Missourian]

Posted this in another thread a few months ago.

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).


-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.


-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.


-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.


-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.


-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
​

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
​

​

But wait...there's more.

Sioux Falls vs. San Francisco

We assume the rich give more than the middle class, the middle class more than the poor. I've heard liberals care more about the less fortunate, so we assume they give more than conservatives do. Are these assumptions truth, or myth?


To test what types of people give more, "20/20" went to two very different parts of the country, with contrasting populations: Sioux Falls, S.D. and San Francisco, Calif. The Salvation Army set up buckets at the busiest locations in each city -- Macy's in San Francisco and Wal-Mart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket collected more money?

Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News​

What's the conclusion?

And what happened in our little test? Well, even though people in Sioux Falls make, on average, half as much money as people in San Francisco, and even though the San Francisco location was much busier — three times as many people were within reach of the bucket — by the end of the second day, the Sioux Falls bucket held twice as much money.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Who Gives to Charity?

​

Don't like those sources?

Well, here's a piece from the New York Times from 2008:

This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.



Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.


Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals.

A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.


Other research has reached similar conclusions. The “generosity index” from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so...


<snip>



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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html


​

The premise of your argument "Every Republican places his own interests above those of any other person." has been thoroughly debunked.

In fact the case has been made that in fact the opposite holds true...that Republicans place the interest of other people HIGHER than there own, as Republicans are more likely to personally sacrifice more monetarily and a larger percentage of their income to charity.​

​

​

 

[beowolfe]

Liberals, this is why conservatives don't want to be forced into giving more money away... because they voluntarily give much more to charity than liberals..... and liberals claim to be for the less fortunate...

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers

Just dying to find a way to say 'we're better than you', aren't you.... newsflash.... liberals and conservatives are the same. Asolutely the same. One is not better than the other; nor is one worse than the other.

 

[Care4all]

Posted this in another thread a few months ago.

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).


-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.


-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.


-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.


-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.


-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
​

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
​

​

But wait...there's more.

Sioux Falls vs. San Francisco

We assume the rich give more than the middle class, the middle class more than the poor. I've heard liberals care more about the less fortunate, so we assume they give more than conservatives do. Are these assumptions truth, or myth?


To test what types of people give more, "20/20" went to two very different parts of the country, with contrasting populations: Sioux Falls, S.D. and San Francisco, Calif. The Salvation Army set up buckets at the busiest locations in each city -- Macy's in San Francisco and Wal-Mart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket collected more money?

Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News​

What's the conclusion?

And what happened in our little test? Well, even though people in Sioux Falls make, on average, half as much money as people in San Francisco, and even though the San Francisco location was much busier — three times as many people were within reach of the bucket — by the end of the second day, the Sioux Falls bucket held twice as much money.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Who Gives to Charity?

​

Don't like those sources?

Well, here's a piece from the New York Times from 2008:

This holiday season is a time to examine who’s been naughty and who’s been nice, but I’m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.



Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.


Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals.

A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.


Other research has reached similar conclusions. The “generosity index” from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so...


<snip>



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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html


​

The premise of your argument "Every Republican places his own interests above those of any other person." has been thoroughly debunked.

In fact the case has been made that in fact the opposite holds true...that Republicans place the interest of other people HIGHER than there own, as Republicans are more likely to personally sacrifice more monetarily and a larger percentage of their income to charity.​

​

​

not really a sound analysis.... not at all sound.

there is no way they can tell if it were not the dems in those red states doing the donating...

also taking a tiny town vs a hustling city is not comparable either....they could have used Dallas, and it would have been a bit more comparable...

if they came right out and asked each person donating then it would be clearer...

and is charity only donating to the poor or is charity also donating to the sciences and arts?

 

[Missourian]

Posted this in another thread a few months ago.

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).


-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.


-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.


-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.


-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.


-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
​

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers
​

​

But wait...there's more.

Sioux Falls vs. San Francisco

We assume the rich give more than the middle class, the middle class more than the poor. I've heard liberals care more about the less fortunate, so we assume they give more than conservatives do. Are these assumptions truth, or myth?


To test what types of people give more, "20/20" went to two very different parts of the country, with contrasting populations: Sioux Falls, S.D. and San Francisco, Calif. The Salvation Army set up buckets at the busiest locations in each city -- Macy's in San Francisco and Wal-Mart in Sioux Falls. Which bucket collected more money?

Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News​

What's the conclusion?

And what happened in our little test? Well, even though people in Sioux Falls make, on average, half as much money as people in San Francisco, and even though the San Francisco location was much busier &#8212; three times as many people were within reach of the bucket &#8212; by the end of the second day, the Sioux Falls bucket held twice as much money.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Who Gives to Charity?

​

Don't like those sources?

Well, here's a piece from the New York Times from 2008:

This holiday season is a time to examine who&#8217;s been naughty and who&#8217;s been nice, but I&#8217;m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.



Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.


Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, &#8220;Who Really Cares,&#8221; cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals.

A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.


Other research has reached similar conclusions. The &#8220;generosity index&#8221; from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so...


<snip>



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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html


​

The premise of your argument "Every Republican places his own interests above those of any other person." has been thoroughly debunked.

In fact the case has been made that in fact the opposite holds true...that Republicans place the interest of other people HIGHER than there own, as Republicans are more likely to personally sacrifice more monetarily and a larger percentage of their income to charity.​

​

not really a sound analysis.... not at all sound.

there is no way they can tell if it were not the dems in those red states doing the donating...

also taking a tiny town vs a hustling city is not comparable either....they could have used Dallas, and it would have been a bit more comparable...

if they came right out and asked each person donating then it would be clearer...

and is charity only donating to the poor or is charity also donating to the sciences and arts?

What difference would it make...bustling city or smaller city ?

If it were actually Dems in red states, wouldn't it be higher where there were more Dems?

You should read the entire post...your question is answered.

Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, &#8220;Who Really Cares,&#8221; cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.


Other research has reached similar conclusions. The &#8220;generosity index&#8221; from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so...


​