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/poststa...550.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/poststa...550.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.

[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)