Kristof: Liberals Are Cheap Towards The Poor

[Kathianne]

at least personally. They are BIG spenders of public $$$:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=1&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink


December 21, 2008
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Bleeding Heart Tightwads

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
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.

The upshot is that Democrats, who speak passionately about the hungry and homeless, personally fork over less money to charity than Republicans — the ones who try to cut health insurance for children....

[Joe Steel]

at least personally. They are BIG spenders of public $$$:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=1&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

That's as it should be. Subidizing the poor is the government's responsibility.

[Kathianne]

That's as it should be. Subidizing the poor is the government's responsibility.

Hardly and if one truly CARED about the 'poor amongst us', they'd want the most efficient, not least venues for delivering the help.

[darin]

That's as it should be. Subidizing the poor is the government's responsibility.

Translation: I shouldn't give MY money to those without - we should give another's money.

:-/

Stupid.

The POOR have the responsbility to fix their finances - not anybody else.

[avatar4321]

That's as it should be. Subidizing the poor is the government's responsibility.

First, the poor dont need to be subsidized. The whole point of point of subsidizing people is to keep their specific skill/quality from disappearing. What you are saying is you want to make sure the poor stay poor. Why would we want to do that?

Second, the whole point of self governance and limited government is so that the people can do good through their own actions. Its not the governments job. its the job of good people.

[5stringJeff]

That's as it should be. Subidizing the poor is the government's responsibility.

Incorrect. Giving money to those less fortunate should be a choice, not a mandate.

[April15]

I am not a rich man but as a child in church one sunday the preacher said he wanted the congregation to raise money for the poorest family in the church. Shit my brother and I thought we would win this hands down. We scrounged every empty lot for coke bottles to redeem and asked our neighbors for donations to the poorest family in our church.
Well to make it short we gave the money we made to the preacher. He looked at us like we did something wrong. That sunday in church he called our families name to come receive the donations. My brother and I put in all we earned and to see that the money in total was a couple of bucks more than the ten we put in kinda soured me on charity.

[avatar4321]

I am not a rich man but as a child in church one sunday the preacher said he wanted the congregation to raise money for the poorest family in the church. Shit my brother and I thought we would win this hands down. We scrounged every empty lot for coke bottles to redeem and asked our neighbors for donations to the poorest family in our church.
Well to make it short we gave the money we made to the preacher. He looked at us like we did something wrong. That sunday in church he called our families name to come receive the donations. My brother and I put in all we earned and to see that the money in total was a couple of bucks more than the ten we put in kinda soured me on charity.

So you were soured on charity because no one was charitable to your family when you were a kid?

[April15]

So you were soured on charity because no one was charitable to your family when you were a kid?No. What was sour was that my family cared more than anyone else for the poor and we had the least. It taught me to care for yourself as no one else will.

[avatar4321]

No. What was sour was that my family cared more than anyone else for the poor and we had the least. It taught me to care for yourself as no one else will.

I dont see why it should stop you from helping others.

[April15]

I dont see why it should stop you from helping others.I do help anyone who asks. I just won't help religious projects or people. They can pray!

[stephanie]

I do help anyone who asks. I just won't help religious projects or people. They can pray!


anyone every tell you...you're a sourpuss??:coffee:

[April15]

anyone every tell you...you're a sourpuss??:coffee:Yes many people tell me. But when the shit hits the fan who do they call? Me.