Study: Less religious states give less to charity

[longnecker]

BOSTON (AP) — A new study on the generosity of Americans suggests that states with the least religious residents are also the stingiest about giving money to charity.

The study released Monday by the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that residents in states where religious participation is higher than the rest of the nation, particularly in the South, gave the greatest percentage of their discretionary income to charity.
The Northeast, with lower religious participation, was the least generous to charities, with the six New England states filling the last six slots among the 50 states. Churches are among the organizations counted as charities by the study, and some states in the Northeast rank in the top 10 when religious giving is not counted.
The study also found that patterns of charitable giving are colored in political reds and blues.
Of the 10 least generous states, nine voted for Democrat Barack Obama for president in the last election. By contrast, of the 10 most generous states, eight voted for Republican John McCain.
But Peter Panepento, the Chronicle's assistant managing editor, said that political breakdown likely speaks to a state's religious makeup, not its prevailing political views. He noted the lowest-ranked Democrat states were also among the least religious, while the top-ranked Republican states were among the more religious.
"I don't know if I could go out and say it's a complete Republican-Democrat difference as much as it is different religious attitudes and culture in these states," he said.
The study was based on Internal Revenue Service records of people who itemized deductions in 2008, the most recent year statistics were available. read more
http://www.mediacomtoday.com/news/re....org%3E&ps=931

[Josef]

Makes sense since giving to your church is considered a charity and when you dont have a religious affiliation you don't have a church to give to.

[Beau Stockard]

Another interesting thing that I noticed was that wealthier states seemed to give less to charitable institutions like churches than poorer states did. Would that mean that poor people are more generous to others with what little they own then their wealthier , more well-off neighbors? The 99% are more charitable than the 1% . Isn't this what Jesus said so long ago?

Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God. Luke vi. 20 and But woe to you that are rich: for you have your consolation. Luke vi 24

[Curly]

Back in the day I worked on a delivery truck (carpeting, area rugs, oriental rugs etc). Many of the company's customer base was Centerville and Greenville area. You'd spend up to 6 hours changing their winter rugs over to the summer rugs (and visa vesa) Tips? I usually got tips from middle income people and poorer people. I took the tips from those that could afford it but declined the offers from those struggling with little success, they were a stubborn bunch. The rich people wouldn't offer me the sweat off their ass and complained about the noise we made moving the furniture. These people were so rich, the help had their own house on the property. Cooks, maids, grounds people.......you name it. To be fair, I've met many rich people that were pretty cool and generous. Come to think of it, the tight pricks were the ones who inherited their wealth. Ok, back on topic.

[Beau Stockard]

I've noticed Curly that you're a natural-born story teller. Have you ever had any aspirations to become a professional writer? I like that you never offer just the bare bones, nuts&bolts of an argument, but embellish it with illustrative narratives that are often drawn from your own unique , personal histories.

[Curly]

I've noticed Curly that you're a natural-born story teller. Have you ever had any aspirations to become a professional writer? I like that you never offer just the bare bones, nuts&bolts of an argument, but embellish it with illustrative narratives that are often drawn from your own unique , personal histories.

I could be just full of shit, lol.
I only try to make things as though we are sitting down over food or a drink and just discussing things. It's to easy to offend and things get taken wrong with printed words. Intent, meaning and true feelings get lost. I've been poking you lately with the figurative stick, trying to figure you out since you're the new guy. So far, you haven't gotten angry or resorted to any nasty stuff. I have to respect that. You have some interesting input.

[Kid Lester]

Back in the day I worked on a delivery truck (carpeting, area rugs, oriental rugs etc). Many of the company's customer base was Centerville and Greenville area. You'd spend up to 6 hours changing their winter rugs over to the summer rugs (and visa vesa) Tips? I usually got tips from middle income people and poorer people. I took the tips from those that could afford it but declined the offers from those struggling with little success, they were a stubborn bunch. The rich people wouldn't offer me the sweat off their ass and complained about the noise we made moving the furniture. These people were so rich, the help had their own house on the property. Cooks, maids, grounds people.......you name it. To be fair, I've met many rich people that were pretty cool and generous. Come to think of it, the tight pricks were the ones who inherited their wealth. Ok, back on topic.

You have just described the issue that people have with Mitt Romney.

It's not his money. It's that he doesn't appreciate how he got it, or what people have to do to earn a piece of it. Nobody hates a millionaire. People hate a millionaire that acts like we're all peons for not being millionaires.

[EpicWin]

[Curly]

You have just described the issue that people have with Mitt Romney.

It's not his money. It's that he doesn't appreciate how he got it, or what people have to do to earn a piece of it. Nobody hates a millionaire. People hate a millionaire that acts like we're all peons for not being millionaires.

I can agree with that Kid, I see it too. All politicians are like that. Some are just better at the bullshit......or they read it off the teleprompter. Either way, Obama isn't a hard act to follow and I don't care if Romney is one of those pricks I mentioned just as long as he can get this economy back on track and get people working. Obama obviously can't, he wants a dependent society. It's a shame really, I don't care at all for Obama's policies yet I only have one other option to chose from? WTF? I'd be more excited if Romney/Ryan would flip the ticket. IMO, Ryan is a much more stand up guy than Romney could ever be. As the media puts it, more likable.

[Beau Stockard]

Ryan is a much more stand up guy than Romney could ever be. As the media puts it, more likable.

Paul Ryan is a Big Government careerist technocrat with grandiose plans to radically rearrange our divided -authority government in ways that we never have seen before. Our American government may sometimes appear like a clinking, clanking , awkward , consensus-breaking Rube Goldberg -like machine, but it has done us quite well in holding absolute power at bay and preserving the diversity of interest-group pluralism for over 200 years. Our hallowed political system handed down to us from generations of previous Americans can always use some tinkering, adjustment to the pressing claims and needs of our own day and age , but throwing it all out and starting over I think is not a wise option. I guess, like Max , I am too much the child of the sixties . If government can at least be made tolerable then let it work imperfectly to protect the public interest as long as I'm able to get back to what is most valuable in my life, my kids, family welfare, and plenty of time to play with my girls in the backyard on summer evenings, looking up at the stars, telling stories over beers with the neighbors, listening to the band and football practice before the school season starts with fireflies flittering and cicadas chirping in the twilight.

[EpicWin]

Another interesting thing that I noticed was that wealthier states seemed to give less to charitable institutions like churches than poorer states did. Would that mean that poor people are more generous to others with what little they own then their wealthier , more well-off neighbors? The 99% are more charitable than the 1% . Isn't this what Jesus said so long ago?

[Curly]

Paul Ryan is a Big Government careerist technocrat with grandiose plans to radically rearrange our divided -authority government in ways that we never have seen before.

And Obama isn't big government? Give me a break.

[max1]

Paul Ryan is a Big Government careerist technocrat with grandiose plans to radically rearrange our divided -authority government in ways that we never have seen before.

Could you elaborate on that a bit? I'm not to sure what you mean

[Beau Stockard]

Ever since my high school English teacher, Mr. Roccia assigned B. F. Skinner's, "Beyond Freedom and Dignity" and "Walden II" utopian writers and thinkers of all stripes have scared the you know what outta' me. I've been wary of too-readily embracing anyone who claims to remake the world in his own better image. Paul Ryan has consistently proposed complete overhauls of our Government social safety net system , for example his schemes to gradually 'privatize ' social security and medicare , but without allowing for any checks and balances on free maket activity. Somehow, Ryan wants us to take on faith, market forces acting alone will make all things better. When has that ever happened? Paul Ryan fails to show any evidence from history where the free market has ever been self-correcting. But, there have been numerous historical examples, most recently in 2008 , and in the collapse of the Congress of Vienna world order just prior to WW I that if states refuse to act collectively and on their own to regulate free market forces then it can often spiral dangerously out of control with trade wars, arms races , beggar-thy neighbor policies, economic retaliation(embargoes and disagreements over tariffs and other barriers to trade) that can nose-dive economies , crash stock exchanges, cause panic runs on banks, riots, domestic unrest ,and even world wars. So, let's have an honest and open debate on whether we want to trust the party who wants to overhaul the entire Government we have enjoyed for over 200 years or the party who despite disagreement on methods still thinks that our government functions pretty well and can be improved with adjustments, like fairer cost- sharing between high , middle , and low wage earners, better educational opportunities opened to more of our diverse cultural and social population, and reducing costly global military committments where we have no interests of our own to protect and don't really belong .

[max1]

Wow, pretty well put together opinion Thanks for clearing up some things for me :-)

[Curly]

All I saw was Beau describe Obama to a tee except replace "privatize/market with "government run". Obama, there's a guy with all kinds of checks and balances in place.

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.
Adolf Hitler

[EpicWin]

All I saw was Beau describe Obama to a tee except replace "privatize/market with "government run". Obama, there's a guy with all kinds of checks and balances in place.

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.
Adolf Hitler

[Beau Stockard]

Obama, there's a guy with all kinds of checks and balances in place.

Anyone remember with me besides President Obama James Madison's advice in Federalist #51 to counterbalance the rise of factions in democratic society and government?

But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. ...Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. ... A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

[Curly]

Good thing they're so transparent. I don't trust any of them Beau. It benefits me to walk down the center even though I lean to the right a little.

[Beau Stockard]

@Epic Win,

"privatize/market with "government run".

However , Obama rejected a totally government -run overhaul of our healthcare system such as the single-payer public option(although the choice is left open for future consideration by the people) Instead, Obama chose to accept our US healthcare system as is, making internal reforms to reduce waste, fraud,and abuse that improves the better healthcare rewards to every insured American. He also chose to include the states , Big Healthcare providers, doctors, hospitals, people who can afford to buy healthcare insurance ,but do not for private, selfish reasons, insurers, and Big Pharma in fair cost-sharing measures so no one has to face the financial burden for paying for a sustainable healthcare system alone.