Who Donates more? Lefties or Righties

[Frostbit]

I wonder if there's any statistical data out there on which political ideology seems to donate in the greatest amount per income. Reason for wondering…

We are raising money for the American Cancer Society via Relay for Life. We put the link on Joyce's Facebook page and I've noticed something interesting. Admittedly this is very anecdotal but it made me wonder. When we put an update about Chemo or even a picture of Joyce in front of the Chemo Center door she gets 50-80 likes in about 36 hours. Comments offering encouragement also pour forth.

When we put up the announcement of forming TEAM WOJO for the Relay for Life she got maybe a dozen likes and a half dozen comments. Anecdotally, those that commented or "liked" and contributed we know well enough to know their political tilt and it's right center to far right.

Don't get me wrong, I really don't care who gives and who doesn't. A friends a friend and that friendship would never be measured on their ability or willingness to give to the ACS.

What made me wonder about this in the first place is I noticed that those that offered lots of suggestions in the beginning about programs available, support services, financial assistance programs, including suggestion of filing for SS disability have pretty much been the ones that are noticeably absent from the Relay for Life post. A lot of these folks work for the Indian Health Service (the epitome of the Federal Tit) and seemed very quick to point towards agencies funded by Government or other's donations yet have disappeared in force when personal donation was involved.

Just interesting to me!!

[Billy Jingo]

You can download a paper on the issue here.

It is pretty much equal.

[Frostbit]

You can download a paper on the issue here.

It is pretty much equal.

Interesting!!

I wonder if by excluding religious donations they altered the outcome somewhat. I guess that also implies that "Righties" are more likely to support religion than "Lefties".

Abstract:
Voluntary contributions from individuals are the lifeblood of nonprofit organizations, which in turn fund a large portion of social services in the United States. Given this reliance donor generosity, it is important to understand who contributes, and to where. In this paper, we argue against the conventional wisdom that political conservatives are inherently more generous toward private charities than liberals. At the individual level, the large bivariate relationship between giving and conservatism vanishes after adjusting for differences in income and religiosity. At the state level, we find no evidence of a relationship between charitable giving and Republican presidential voteshare. Finally, we show that any remaining differences in giving are an artifact of Republicans' greater propensity to give to religious causes, particularly their own church. Taken together, our results counter the notion that political conservatives compensate for their opposition to governmental intervention by supporting private charities.

[Gingersnap]

"Religiosity" is indeed the characteristic that tips the balance much in favor of right-leaning people in study after study.

[Billy Jingo]

"Religiosity" is indeed the characteristic that tips the balance much in favor of right-leaning people in study after study.

The question would be whether or not what you give to church is really charitable giving? We give to a few causes consistently, and others sporadically, but our church is by far the largest. And I mean straight church funding not side stuff that are religious in nature like Episcopal Relief & Development or Union Gospel Mission.

[phillygirl]

The question would be whether or not what you give to church is really charitable giving? We give to a few causes consistently, and others sporadically, but our church is by far the largest. And I mean straight church funding not side stuff that are religious in nature like Episcopal Relief & Development or Union Gospel Mission.

Isn't church funding religious in nature?

I give to a few causes consistently, my church is the smallest of my contributions, generally.

[Billy Jingo]

Isn't church funding religious in nature?

I probably didn't word that well. What I meant was something that even though it is affiliated with a church, could very easily be a secular endeavor as opposed to maintaining a church.

[Novaheart]

Isn't church funding religious in nature?

I give to a few causes consistently, my church is the smallest of my contributions, generally.

Some people think that the money they give to or through their church should always count as charitable giving. I don't consider financial support for evangelism to be charitable. Of course, the lines get blurred when a church group does gift-with-purchase, ie you buy into our religion and we'll give food to your fly covered children.

[Gingersnap]

Religious people give more to both sacred and secular charities than non-religious people do. Right-leaning religious people give more than left-leaning religious people. Poor/working class religious people consistently give more to both church and secular charities as a proportion of net income than middle/upper class people.

Apparently the stingiest people are upper class, liberal atheists.

[phillygirl]

Some people think that the money they give to or through their church should always count as charitable giving. I don't consider financial support for evangelism to be charitable. Of course, the lines get blurred when a church group does gift-with-purchase, ie you buy into our religion and we'll give food to your fly covered children.

I think regular church goers are probably more charitable minded, if for no other reason, belonging to most churches increases the opportunity for you to be asked for money for charitable causes.

[scott]

You can download a paper on the issue here.

It is pretty much equal.

Only by excluding religious charities is it equal. Otherwise it's tilted to the right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=0

http://philanthropy.com/article/How-The-Chronicle-Compiled-Its/133667/

[Novaheart]

I think regular church goers are probably more charitable minded, if for no other reason, belonging to most churches increases the opportunity for you to be asked for money for charitable causes.

Clearly you have never worked in a large cube farm. Church takes a shot at your wallet one day a week. The cube farm has someone trolling about asking for donations to this school or that project just about every day. I finally had to put my foot down at Megabank, at staff meeting, and declare that we all have our charitable interests but that it was rude to put co-workers on the spot for charitable donations…. especially for causes which refusal could be construed as hostility towards the sponsor group.

[Novaheart]

Only by excluding religious charities is it equal. Otherwise it's tilted to the right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=0

http://philanthropy.com/article/How-...ed-Its/133667/

In any case, if conservative donations often end up building extravagant churches, liberal donations frequently sustain art museums, symphonies, schools and universities that cater to the well-off. (It’s great to support the arts and education, but they’re not the same as charity for the needy. And some research suggests that donations to education actually increase inequality because they go mostly to elite institutions attended by the wealthy.)

I'll take issue with this segment from your NYT link. There is a huge difference between Joe donating $1M to build a Mormon temple which has no productive value whatsoever and even if it did would only benefit the relative handful of fairly well off people who currently meet somewhere else, and Rick donating $1M to the Smithsonian, which is free and open to the public for the enrichment and intellectual stimulation of any who visit (rich or poor).

Not to mention the sheer arrogance of sending missionaries to countries that are 98% committed to an existing religion.

[Billy Jingo]

Clearly you have never worked in a large cube farm. Church takes a shot at your wallet one day a week. The cube farm has someone trolling about asking for donations to this school or that project just about every day. I finally had to put my foot down at Megabank, at staff meeting, and declare that we all have our charitable interests but that it was rude to put co-workers on the spot for charitable donations…. especially for causes which refusal could be construed as hostility towards the sponsor group.

Jeez dude just don't buy the fucking cookies.

Better yet, get your asshole neighbors to stop shitting their pants over taxes so middle school kids don't have to beg for money.

[Billy Jingo]

Only by excluding religious charities is it equal. Otherwise it's tilted to the right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=0

http://philanthropy.com/article/How-...ed-Its/133667/

It’s true that religion is the essential reason conservatives give more, and religious liberals are as generous as religious conservatives. Among the stingiest of the stingy are secular conservatives.

Ginger seems to have gotten it wrong.

And again, is maintaining a church really charity?

In any case, if conservative donations often end up building extravagant churches, liberal donations frequently sustain art museums, symphonies, schools and universities that cater to the well-off.

That is bullshit. If you think only the wealthy go to the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth or Bass Hall, you are an idiot. Nevermind that comparing art venues open to the public with a church is absurd on its face.