DADvocate

John Stossel hosted a segment on 20/20 regarding conservatives giving more to charity. Stossel refers to the same book that I referred to about three weeks ago. Stossel must be using me as an inspiration.

Here are some more tidbits.

"Conservatives are even 18 percent more likely to donate blood. "

[---]

Says Brooks: "The most charitable people in America today are the working poor."

We saw that in Sioux Falls, S.D. The workers at the meat packing plant make about $35,000, yet the Sioux Falls United Way says it gets more contributions of over $500 from employees there than anywhere else.

[---]

Finally, Brooks says one thing stands out as the biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable: "their religious participation." Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money -- four times as much.

But doesn't that giving just stay within the religion?

"No," says Brooks, "Religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly nonreligious charities. Religious people give more blood; religious people give more to homeless people on the street."

Stossel also ran a little experiment of his own.

To test them, ABC's "20/20" went to Sioux Falls, S.D., and San Francisco. We asked the Salvation Army to set up buckets at their busiest locations in both cities. Which bucket would get more money?

[---]

And what happened in our little test? Well, even though people in Sioux Falls make, on average, half as much money as people in San Francisco, and even though the San Francisco location was much busier -- three times as many people were within reach of the bucket -- by the end of the second day, the Sioux Falls bucket held twice as much money.

Another myth bites the dust.

My 13 year old son and his friends worked the Salvation Army bucket at the Walmart in Maysville, KY today. I have a special affinity for The Salvation Army (besides The Band singing about it). Taking a course on the sociology of disasters in college, I learned that The Salvation Army was the best disaster relief organization.

The primary reason for this is that The Salvation Army helps whomever needs help. They don't check your credentials, bank account, etc. They simply feed, cloth and provide shelter for victims of disaster. They do it quickly and effectively. The Salvation Army also provides a myriad of other social services.

Personally, I like to give my time and money to non-political charitable organizations that focus on making life better for people. Once an organization, charitable or not, starts making political statements than run a high risk of losing my support. I haven't bought myself a pair of Levis since they quit giving money to Boy Scouts of America.

On Thanksgiving I posted a rather innocuous comment at marccooper regarding conservatives being more generous than liberals.

Those of you who criticize Woody’s remarks just remember that religious conservatives actually give more than secular liberals to help those less fortunate than themselves. Solid proof here and here. Have fun engaging in your ad hominems but write a check to charity first.

But those wonderful liberals can't tolerate the hint of criticism. (And why should they, everyone knows liberalism is an infinitely superior philosophy compared to conservatism.)

One liberal responded:

BTW, this year the wife and I will probably include the ACLU, MercyCorps, Amnesty International and the Nationa Resources Defense Council as our targeted charities.

Charities? Although it has a definite political tint, I suppose you could consider Mercy Corps as a charity. The others are not charities. They are political organizations with political agendas. There is a difference between a charitable organization and a not-for-profit organization. Sometimes that difference can be tremendous.

Some guy calling himself Ed Watters said,

Conservatives, when slashing social programs, usually rationalize by saying that ‘throwing money’ at a problem is counterproductive, ‘creating dependance’.

So I can only conclude that all of the christian conservative donations spring from malevolent intentions.

Hey Everyone! Go to DADvocate’s Sept ‘05 archive (re: Cindy Shehan) and you’ll find all you need to know about DAD’s sense of compassion.

Yep, if I don't buy into Cindy Sheehan's shenanigans, I'm lacking compassion. If a person like Watters considered me compassionate, I'd worry. I wonder if the not capitalizing Christian was intentional, or just a mistake like misspelling dependence.

reg says:

Incidentally and since shifting the subject has proven convenient for Dadvocate, “compassionate conservatism” was founded primarily on a debate over allocation of tax monies to private religious organizations because they would supposedly be more effective in enforcing a moral code on the poor. Using taxes to fund charitable efforts, for which “Dadvocate” presumably lambastes liberals, was at the very core of this “conservative” movement to empower fundamentalist sects in the social service sphere.

I never brought up "compassionate conservatism." For me it's just and advertising slogan and a straw man for liberals to throw darts at. Liberals like doing that because facing reality is too painful. I think we should be taxed less and give more to charity, real charity, not the ACLU.

Randy Paul accused The Salvation Army of corruption.

With regard to the Salvation Army, their financial controls are piss poor. An embezzlement here, an embezzlement there.

"Any excuse will serve a tyrant." -Aesop

Randy found his excuse. I'm sure United Way nor any other "liberal approved" organization has experienced embezzlement. (Please don't think about the Democratic Jefferson guy when you read this. Too much reality.)

I put something in The Salvation Army bucket every time I go to a store that has one. I don't claim any charitable deductions. Don't need to. Maybe, for once, Uncle Sam will put a couple of extra bucks to good use.

Keep on giving all ye conservatives. All ye liberal brethren, give just a little bit more. It actually feels good. And as you say, "If it feels good, do it."