Study:Conservatives More Generous than Libs(Syc.com)

[White_Male_Canada]

WHO'S MORE GENEROUS: LIBERALS OR CONSERVATIVES?
FINDINGS OF PHILANTHROPY EXPERT ARE A SURPRISE, ESPECIALLY TO HIMSELF

Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks is about to become the darling of the religious right wing in America - and it's making him nervous.

The child of academics, raised in a liberal household and educated in the liberal arts, Brooks has written a book that concludes religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income.

In the book, to be released next month(Nov.24), he cites extensive data analysis to demonstrate that values advocated by conservatives - from church attendance to two-parent families to the Protestant work ethic and a distaste for government-funded social services - make conservatives more generous than liberals.

When it comes to helping the needy, he writes: "For too long, liberals have been claiming they are the most virtuous members of American society. Although they usually give less to charity, they have nevertheless lambasted conservatives for their callousness in the face of social injustice." ...



http://www.syracuse.com/news/poststandard/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1162461303265550.xml&coll=1

"For too long, liberals have been claiming they are the most virtuous members of American society. Although they usually give less to charity, they have nevertheless lambasted conservatives for their callousness in the face of social injustice." ...

http://www.syracuse.com/news/poststandard/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1162461303265550.xml&coll=1

This is consistent with what Bill Press has said.

It's not your beliefs that matter, it's your actions. What we see here is that Christians Conservatives in general are the most generous and kind people when it comes to helping those in need. While limosuine liberals sit on the sidelines screaming "Our hearts go out to you", it's conservatives who actually produce the actions to help.

It's the same globally as well. Countries such as Iran, North Korea, Venezuela giving little to nothing. While loudly criticizing America as "The serpent" or Bush as "The Devil".

Iran pledged helped only to Islamic Indonesia
North Korea pledged only 150k
Venezuela pledged satan.

While the United States gave nearly 3 trillion dollars through GO and Non-Governmental organizations.

It seems America is the shining light and humanity's best hope.

[LG]

What rubbish. America is the biggest economy in the world and for this reason gives more in aid than any other nation. But the facts show that America gives less than most countries and significantly less than most European nations as a percentage of gross national product or gross income. Which means, to put it in words you will understand, that an average American is less generous than an average Dutchman.

The OECD's figures prove this: In 2005, America's development aid amount to 0.22 % of the GNI. This percentage was less than a third what the Dutch gave, half of what the French gave and also less than what the British gave.

Actually, the Americans as individuals may be generous but the US as a nation is not, and any suggestion otherwise is as laughable as the $35 million George Bush had initially pledged for tsunami relief. The amount pledged after the disaster was about the same what was to be spent to celebrate Bush's inaugaration.

In the end, as far as I know, the US gave a hell of a lot more, partly thanks to international pressure, but much was gathered by NGOs and private individuals. But Australia and the Netherlands gave four times as much in relation to their GNP as did other nations.

As for your estimate of $3 trillion, I wonder what you get your numbers from. Do you know what a trillion is? It might interest you to read that America's GNP is , as I understand, $10 trillion and the GDP is, according to every source I've read, about $12 trillion.

Back to the classroom, Tfan. You've got some learning to do.

As for your final suggestion I have one thing to say: You must be fucking joking!

[guyone]

And how much did your undisclosed country give wise guy?

[LG]

And how much did your undisclosed country give wise guy?

guyone, in the whole spectrum of lameass comebacks, this one is the weakest and most childish of them all.

And in any case, my country gave comparatively more as a percentage of GNP than the US did. As did most European countries, I believe.



8)

[guyone]

Lame? At least I'm honest enough to state where I live and not hide behind a shroud of mystery. It's very cowardly to attack under the guise of anonymity.

And judging by percentages is like grading papers on a bell curve. America exponentially out gives any other country on earth. So stop the crap.

[LG]

And judging by percentages is like grading papers on a bell curve. America exponentially out gives any other country on earth. So stop the crap.

Judging by percentages is the only way to judge fairly in this case. Maybe you shoud redo Math 101. I hope they can also teach you what "exponentially" means.

As for being concerned with where I come from, it's irrelevant, as is where you come from. We are not talking about me or you, or even about most Americans, but about the government of the US.

And, may say, your comebacks continue to be lame.

[guyone]

ex·po·nen·tial - expressible or approximately expressible by an exponential function; especially : characterized by or being an extremely rapid increase (as in size or extent) <an exponential growth rate>



And, may say, your comebacks continue to be lame.

As are your country's contributions compared to America's.


Greedy little yellow belly.

[LG]

The word "exponentially" refers to growth. Microorganisms in a petri dish grow exponentially. The human population, if left unchecked, can grow exponentially (this is what Thomas Malthus suggested). An uncontrolled nuclear reaction increases the energy produced exponetially to an extent. Computer power has increased exponetially, one could say, as has the reach of the internet. The term implies an increase or growth based on the exponential function exp(x) where e is Euler's number, the base of the natural logarithm.

Someone cannot give exponentially unless the amount given increases exponetially each time he gives. That means that the amount given more than doubles each year. And this is not the case for the US or, indeed, any other nation.

As for my country's contributions compared to America's, you're being quite laughable. You'd expect the world's biggest economy to give more money but I have conclusively proven- and this is what you cannot handle- that per capita America gives less. Just accept the truth.

And an interesting note: In the UK, a yellowbelly is a native of Lincolnshire. In the US it is a slang term for a coward, a word you would not use if you knew me better. But you don't know me and I don't know you. And amen to that: judging from your attitude and remarks, you're not the kind of person I'd ever want to get to know.

[guyone]

Wow! What an ungrateful bastard you are. No matter how much we give it's still not enough.

There's gratitude for you.

As for me I hold no ill will towards you. I just like to debate. That's how ideas are explored and evolve.

Food for thought.

(Oh yeah, America's contributions to the world do grow on an exponential basis and the US's GAO has plenty of receipts to prove it)

[LG]

You said:


Wow! What an ungrateful bastard you are. No matter how much we give it's still not enough.

There's gratitude for you.

What a pile of old shite- offensive and untrue at the same time. The European Union, having an intracommunity aid system of its own, does not need US handouts, so you can't call Europeans ungrateful. We receive little or nothing from the US in terms of aid.

On the other hand, after Katrina, European nations and the rest of the world rushed to assist the US. Some say the French did more than FEMA to help the people of New Orleans. The Emirates gave $99 million, China gave $5 million and even poor old Bangladesh, a nation who have had their fair share of natural disasters, gave a million. But the US government misused much of that money and the goodwill of the rest of the world ended up in warehouses or being used for training rather than being used to directly help evacuees. You can read about it here:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3575

Now who should be grateful?

As for your ludicrous suggestion that US contributions do grow on an exponential basis, there is proof otherwise. Your initial assertion that " America exponentially out gives any other country on earth." made no sense, but your attempts to wiggle out of that are embarassing.

True, US contributions have risen in the last few years, but they are not rising exponentially. There is a major rise in 2005, but this is reflected in the contributions of other nations and, I think, can be explained by the donations made after the tsunami in south-east Asia. And if you look at this table, there are more than 20 nations that give more in relation to their GNI than the US does:

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp

All this should not be taken personally by you, although it seems it has. I never said that Americans as a people are not generous. Indeed, contributions from individuals and NGOs outstripped the US government's tsunami relief. All I said was that Tfan's assertion that the US is "humanity's best hope" becuase it gave, as he said "3 trillion" was both wrong and idiotic (and I think you will agree that it was).

A look at the link below disproves him and also disproves much of what you claim. Australia, despite its small population, gave nearly as much as the US to tsunami relief. Click on the tab "Government vs Private Aid" and you shall see that private contributions in the US were almost twice as big as the government's contribution (unlike in other nations) suggesting perhaps, that though Americans are generous, the US government is not.

Next, click on the tab "Government Aid per capita" and you'll see that your government gave just $3 for every American. The government contributions per capita for Australia and Norway were more than ten times higher. And the US' total contribution (government plus private) per capita would be about $6, which is still small.

http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/aidtracker/

Those are the numbers, the facts. If you want to continue with your deluded belief that America is the most generous nation in the world, just becuas you happen to be an American, then fine with me. But I'm done in "debating" this topic because you're not even willing to look at the facts and consider them properly.

[guyone]

Look I realize it's very fashionable to hate America these days because we're cheap, manipulative, war mongers. After all look at all those dead American bodies we left on the beach of Normandy way back in 1944. 2,500 dead bodies would stink any place to high heaven. But to have the gaul to even suggest that the French gave more money to the victims of Katrina than FEMA is completely ludicrous. Hey hate American's or Right wing American's or people on the right if that will make you feel better about yourself. But I always thought that the left was the side of compassion, acceptance, and understanding. All I can see is that Progressives (or to be more accurate - Communists) do not show much tolerance at all.

And the Katrina story on www.foreignpolicy.com is pure communist propaganda. If you want to prove points you can't discount any reference I use but then say all of yours is gospel when a site like www.foreignpolicy.com is simply a site set up to shit all over America and its values. This is an excerpt from a piece on Latin America:


Indeed, as one commentator recently quipped, Latin America can’t compete on the world stage in any aspect, even as a threat. Unlike antiAmericans(sic) elsewhere, Latin Americans are not willing to die for the sake of their geopolitical hatreds. Latin America is a nuclearweapons(sic) free zone. Its only weapon of mass destruction is cocaine. In contrast to emerging markets like India and China, Latin America is a minor economic player whose global significance is declining. Sure, a few countries export oil and gas, but only Venezuela is in the top league of the world’s energy market.

What kind of 'fair & balanced' misfit wrote that? Anti-Americans elsewhere? Who says Latin Americans are anti-American? They all come here in droves. Not to mention the rest of the world.






.

[LG]

And the Katrina story on www.foreignpolicy.com is pure communist propaganda.

Actually, Foreign Policy isn't that biased, I think. Most reviews I read about it say it is pretty impartial. In any case, the facts of the story are easy to verify (see weblinks below)


If you want to prove points you can't discount any reference I use but then say all of yours is gospel when a site like www.foreignpolicy.com is simply a site set up to shit all over America and its values.

Look who's talking? The man who has claimed that every source I quote is "communist propaganda". And you've done it again! You must be fucking joking!

And, in fact, the story I referenced checks out. Here you can read about what France did to help the Katrina victims and about how the US government initially rejected that help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina

Here are some more references:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-09-02-katrinaworldhelps_x.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/04/katrina.world.aid/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina

You can also read about FEMA's failures. There are many more sources than the ones listed here (and even blogs on right-wing websites):

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/30/katrina.fema/
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/09/07/fema/index.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,1103525,00.html

You also said:

Hey hate American's or Right wing American's or people on the right if that will make you feel better about yourself.

I don't hate Americans or rightwingers. I don't think much of your government, but most people outside America and half the people in America seem to agree with me on this. What I really want is not to knock America but to present the truth and make people open their eyes.

Just because you are an American does not mean that the US is God's gift to earth. Americans seem to have been raised to think that God only favours them. They say "God bless America" as if God would choose one people or one country over another. They think that the US is the best, most generous country in the world just because it's their home. Hey, everyone of us thinks he has the prettiest wife, the cutest kids and the coolest clothes, I can understand that. Sometimes the truth is hard to accept.

[White_Male_Canada]

So we have leftists/socialists/neo-marxists actually attempting to somehow prove they are more caring and charitable than Classical Liberals/Conservatives !?

And they do this with incontrovertible evidence staring them in the face !?

Now that is comedy, and reveals just how out of touch they are with reality,living in their bizarro world where they wish their perception were reality and continue in their futile attempts, to make it so,

" If only government were bigger,life would be better.Things would be perfect."

In reality,no matter how big government gets,and i dare anyone to show me where in the US Constitution it specifically states' And there shall be a Federal Emergency Management Agency, it will never be large enough as long as there is one voice that dare criticize.


"...religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income.

In the book, to be released next month(Nov.24), he cites extensive data analysis to demonstrate that values advocated by conservatives - from church attendance to two-parent families to the Protestant work ethic and a distaste for government-funded social services - make conservatives more generous than liberals.

When it comes to helping the needy, he writes: "For too long, liberals have been claiming they are the most virtuous members of American society. Although they usually give less to charity, they have nevertheless lambasted conservatives for their callousness in the face of social injustice..." "

http://www.syracuse.com/news/poststandard/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1162461303265550.xml&coll=1

[chefmike]

Those greedy progressives are at it again... :roll:

Raise the minimum wage?

End tax breaks that in reality only benefit the ultra-rich(and their crooked corporate interests) to any significant degree?

How dare they?

Clearly the very generous right-wing elite have the matter under control!

Keep GIVING these poor slobs money out of their own heart and keep their wage and tax rates the same!

Yeah. You know...

Economic Feudalism.

Slavery.


Individual charitable giving is not a viable substitute for a social safety net.

Nor is it an excuse to gut such programs as Social Security and Medicare(among many others) while enriching the privileged.


Giving to charity doesn't make up for the thievery of these greedy vermin and their minions.

[White_Male_Canada]

Raise the minimum wage?

Please define a "living minimum wage" . Would it be 10 dollars per hour, 15,25 dollars per hour?

Raising the minimum wage will only result in price increases. Companies merely pass on the amount they have to pay for labor to the customer. Combine higher prices with layoffs due to the fact that the company can now not afford as many employees and the end result is inflation coupled with higher unemployment.

Or perhaps you prefer those jobs be shipped overseas to China. Why not,since they`re your ideological brethren.



End tax breaks that in reality only benefit the ultra-rich(and their crooked corporate interests) to any significant degree?

Tax breaks for the rich huh.The Feds raked in higher coporate tax receipts in 2006,26% more than in 2005!

Ultra -rich ? The top 1% of wage earners total share of income taxes paid is over a third, 34.27%, of all income taxes. Which is odd since they paid 33.71% in 2003. Even stranger,their tax rates dropped from 27.25 to 24.31% !

Who are these "ultra-rich" ? The top 1, according to the IRS, make 295 G`s per year and up.

The top 5% of wage earners paid a total of 54.36% of all income taxes,which was ,oddly enough, UP from 2002,which was 53.80%.The top 10% pay 65.84% ,Up from 2002,which was 65.73%.

The top 50% paid 96.54% of all taxes,only up .04% from 2002. Roughly,only $3.50 of every 100 dollars is paid by someone in the bottom 50%.

It is the people who earn money who pay taxes,not the poor.Combine all that with the fact that there is nothing stopping you from donating money to the IRS. If you want to give more then do so.Ahh,but then you`re a leftist. We know leftists/socialists and neo-marxists don`t donate.



Individual charitable giving is not a viable substitute for a social safety net.

Nor is it an excuse to gut such programs as Social Security and Medicare(among many others) while enriching the privileged

Now that the fallacy of the rich not paying taxes has been deconstructed as patently false let`s look at the "social safety net".

Social Security will have unfunded obligations of $10.4 trillion dollars.
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR04/tr04.pdf
The short 75 year projection pegs it at $3.7 trillion shortfall.

Raise taxes? To the extent of crippling the economy,or allow those who can invest their share in stock,bonds etc,while those who cannot remain in the old system.

Oh but then that would allow individualism.Can`t have that being the socialist/neo-marxist you really are.

You`re filled with hate,specifically the envious hate the rich/ class warfare/ divide and conquer type of hate.

And that hate only covers the specific topic of taxes. There`s so much, I find it ugly,black and disturbing to confront all the other issues you have with individual liberty and life in general.

:) Have a nice day :)

As for being concerned with where I come from, it's irrelevant, as is where you come from. We are not talking about me or you, or even about most Americans, but about the government of the US.

And, may say, your comebacks continue to be lame.


I won't even respond to your cowardly and distorted statements of opinion.

But I will say that the people in America are the government. It's clear you are from foreign land of brick turners and ditch diggers, but understand this. We our not subjugated by make-work socialism in this country.

It is the individual American who makes America. Frankly, I don't want the American government giving a single red cent in disaster aid. That is the job of every private American.

[LG]

TFan said:


I won't even respond to your cowardly and distorted statements of opinion.

What are you talking about? I wasn't even talking to you! And cowardly and distorted? No, respond by all means, because I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.


It's clear you are from foreign land of brick turners and ditch diggers


Now you're just trying to be offensive. What you claim is also untrue. We have no ditch diggers in my nation. We have lawyers, doctors, executives, but also builders, farmers and craftsmen, just like any other country. Your statement just shows your misplaced superiority complex. America has farmers and manual workers too. And, judging by your posts, it also has more than its fair share of assholes.


I don't want the American government giving a single red cent in disaster aid. That is the job of every private American.

That's convenient isn't it? I wonder how much you would give then.,, Probably not a single red cent.

Thank God most Americans aren't like you.

[guyone]

Probably not a single red cent.

Yeah because we don't live in...

RED CHINA!!!




(you knew I just had to respond didn't you? Not even a little hint of a smirk?)

What are you talking about? I wasn't even talking to you! And cowardly and distorted? No, respond by all means, because I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

Just read the post I quoted. I know you can do that. But I'm suspicious about why you haven't.


Now you're just trying to be offensive. What you claim is also untrue. We have no ditch diggers in my nation. We have lawyers, doctors, executives, but also builders, farmers and craftsmen, just like any other country.

Then why not tell us which country that is. Which country do you live in?


That's convenient isn't it?

And efficient, especially given that nature of all governments throughout history. Filtering money through the government means hiring rubberstampers and funding "Oversight committees". It's bullshit. I'd rather give my money directly to private aid organizations like Christian Charities.



I wonder how much you would give then.,, Probably not a single red cent.

Actually, statistics say that conservatives contribute more to charities than liberals. Chances are I contributed more than you.


Thank God most Americans aren't like you.

Just the good ones are like me.

[bucatini70]

i won't try to argue with you LG as you are far too researched (though that does not make a person correct) for me to attempt to argue with you but i do think there is some relevence to knowing what country you claim to be a citizen of or reside in, as you "know" where your fellow debaters are citizens of it gives you an vindictive advantage over any debate you may chose to enter.
For my two cents worth you sound like a fellow from Demark, far too opinionated to be Scandivanian, if so you enjoy one of the top 10 wealthiest countries, conjoined with the one of the top ten most expensive countries to live but with a very high quality of life. I don't live live in USA as a personal choice and don't agree with many things they do but as a professional Expat i see all the equally as unfair and particually westerized Europe you should temper some of your rhetoric with some European insight