US Bible Belt Residents the Most Charitable Countrywide

[Nascar_James]

I had already suspected this was true. Now it is confirmed. My state of Oklahoma is not surprisingly listed amungst the top ten.

Looks like the most generous amungst us Americans are those of us within the conservative based states. The liberal states are the stingiest of the bunch.

Read on ...

US Bible Belt States the Most Charitable in Country

Associated Press:

Bible Belt Residents Most Charitable in Country
Sunday, November 20, 2005

PORTLAND, Maine — New Englanders remain among the most tightfisted in the country when it comes to charitable giving while Bible Belt residents are among the most generous, according to an annual index.

For the fourth year running, New Hampshire was the most miserly state, according to the Catalogue of Philanthropy's Generosity Index. Mississippi remained at the top for generosity.

The index, which takes into account both "having" and "giving," is based on average adjusted gross incomes and the value of itemized charitable donations reported to the Internal Revenue Service on 2003 tax returns, the latest available.

However, its methodology has been criticized and has helped give rise to new studies of charitable giving.

"We believe that generosity is a function of how much one gives to the ability one has to give," said Martin Cohn, a spokesman for the Catalogue for Philanthropy, a Boston-based nonprofit that publishes a directory of nonprofit organizations.

Using that standard, the 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia.

The 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan.

But a study by the Boston Foundation concluded that the index presents an undeserved image of New England as a region made up of Yankee skinflints.

"If everyone in Massachusetts gave 100 times as much to charity as we do today and everything else remains the same, we wouldn't get above the bottom half of the chart," said David Trueblood, a spokesman for the foundation. "And no matter what Mississippi did, it couldn't fall below 22nd or 23rd."

The foundation proposed an alternate measure of generosity based on each state's share of overall charitable contributions and income, adjusted for differences in taxes and living costs. Using that methodology, Massachusetts' generosity ranking last year would be 11th, instead of 49th.

Another new study, conducted by The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University on behalf of a group of New England sponsors, also boosts the case for residents of the six-state region.

That study, which supplements IRS data with a survey of representative households, found that individuals in New England give less, on average, to charity than people in other regions, but that the percentage of New Englanders who do contribute is higher than the national average. It also found that contributors in New England tend to favor secular, rather than religious, causes.

Cohn said he was disappointed that the Boston Foundation chose to attack the index without understanding that its purpose is to promote discussion about philanthropy and that it never sought to hang a label on any state.

Trueblood said he wanted to move the discussion away from rankings and toward ways to get people to be more generous.

 

[unclepercy]

I had already suspected this was true. Now it is confirmed. My state of Oklahoma is not surprisingly listed amungst the top ten.

Looks like the most generous amungst us Americans are those of us within the conservative based states. The liberal states are the stingiest of the bunch.

Read on ...

US Bible Belt States the Most Charitable in Country

Associated Press:

Bible Belt Residents Most Charitable in Country
Sunday, November 20, 2005

PORTLAND, Maine — New Englanders remain among the most tightfisted in the country when it comes to charitable giving while Bible Belt residents are among the most generous, according to an annual index.

For the fourth year running, New Hampshire was the most miserly state, according to the Catalogue of Philanthropy's Generosity Index. Mississippi remained at the top for generosity.

The index, which takes into account both "having" and "giving," is based on average adjusted gross incomes and the value of itemized charitable donations reported to the Internal Revenue Service on 2003 tax returns, the latest available.

However, its methodology has been criticized and has helped give rise to new studies of charitable giving.

"We believe that generosity is a function of how much one gives to the ability one has to give," said Martin Cohn, a spokesman for the Catalogue for Philanthropy, a Boston-based nonprofit that publishes a directory of nonprofit organizations.

Using that standard, the 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia.

The 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan.

But a study by the Boston Foundation concluded that the index presents an undeserved image of New England as a region made up of Yankee skinflints.

"If everyone in Massachusetts gave 100 times as much to charity as we do today and everything else remains the same, we wouldn't get above the bottom half of the chart," said David Trueblood, a spokesman for the foundation. "And no matter what Mississippi did, it couldn't fall below 22nd or 23rd."

The foundation proposed an alternate measure of generosity based on each state's share of overall charitable contributions and income, adjusted for differences in taxes and living costs. Using that methodology, Massachusetts' generosity ranking last year would be 11th, instead of 49th.

Another new study, conducted by The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University on behalf of a group of New England sponsors, also boosts the case for residents of the six-state region.

That study, which supplements IRS data with a survey of representative households, found that individuals in New England give less, on average, to charity than people in other regions, but that the percentage of New Englanders who do contribute is higher than the national average. It also found that contributors in New England tend to favor secular, rather than religious, causes.

Cohn said he was disappointed that the Boston Foundation chose to attack the index without understanding that its purpose is to promote discussion about philanthropy and that it never sought to hang a label on any state.

Trueblood said he wanted to move the discussion away from rankings and toward ways to get people to be more generous.

Excuse me, but I don't believe this. If the IRS is the measuring stick, then that only reveals what people SAY they give. This data must be old.

Since Texas has offered to take up the slack for the thousands of Katrina victims when the federal aid runs out, I would say Texas is one of the most generous states. I don't see that on the list. Remember, James, how the data was captured and who it was captured from - that makes a huge difference in the outcome of the study. Even so, it was interesting, and I'm glad you brought it up.

Uncle

 

[Ocean Breeze]

..........and we are off to the races , folks. :wink:

charity is a contest/competition now.. :roll:

Ladies and gentlemen lace your bets.. :wink:

 

[peapod]

Well if it was really charity..they would have to be telling us about would they 8O

 

[no1important]

RE: US Bible Belt Residen

Well a couple possibilities could be why.

- So many poor people living in poverty in those areas. So many can not afford health care.
- So many low paying jobs and having "right to work" laws lowers the standard of living.

People do not have much and need to rely on charity to get by. Katrina showed us all how much absolute destitute poverty there is in the south.

We Bible Belt residents hold on to our money

Living in Alabama where we say that the Good Book is our roadmap doesn't necessarily mean we stack up well against those who take a lesser path when it comes to looking after the poor.

We make a holy crusade of displaying the Ten Commandments, yet don't share nearly enough of our wealth to help the sick, ignorant and poor.

We want God in our classrooms and courts, yet we continue to make people who don't have enough money to live on pay income taxes.

The reason crime is high in the "Bible Belt" and "South" is do to poverty. Thats why they need to rely on charity to get by. People in those areas "give" because they are religious and think they can buy their way into heaven.

 

[Jay]

"People in those areas "give" because they are religious and think they can buy their way into heaven."

:roll:

 

[peapod]

more like fraidy cats that can't take responsibility for their own lives, they have to be told what think and what to do :roll:

 

[missile]

Mainers just don't have the cash to give..they're a lot like the people of my own province But,they are among the kindest and most charitable on this Earth.

 

[peapod]

hot off the press! startling news! you don't really need a book of myths to be charitable, the simple fact that you have to tell people about your "charity" shows the true motive of said "charity" to stroke ones ego, course there are others who make you sing those horrible tunes first.

 

[I think not]

Horrible country we are, it's amazing how we haven't all fled this God forsaken country :roll:

 

[peapod]

Nah, what you got is a horrible government that should be held accountable for their war crimes. Seems to me a great number of your countryman feel the same way.

patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.

The definition of patriotism is:

A. Love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it.
B. Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy.
C. Heh.

Answer: A

 

[Nascar_James]

I had already suspected this was true. Now it is confirmed. My state of Oklahoma is not surprisingly listed amungst the top ten.

Looks like the most generous amungst us Americans are those of us within the conservative based states. The liberal states are the stingiest of the bunch.

Read on ...

US Bible Belt States the Most Charitable in Country

Associated Press:

Bible Belt Residents Most Charitable in Country
Sunday, November 20, 2005

PORTLAND, Maine — New Englanders remain among the most tightfisted in the country when it comes to charitable giving while Bible Belt residents are among the most generous, according to an annual index.

For the fourth year running, New Hampshire was the most miserly state, according to the Catalogue of Philanthropy's Generosity Index. Mississippi remained at the top for generosity.

The index, which takes into account both "having" and "giving," is based on average adjusted gross incomes and the value of itemized charitable donations reported to the Internal Revenue Service on 2003 tax returns, the latest available.

However, its methodology has been criticized and has helped give rise to new studies of charitable giving.

"We believe that generosity is a function of how much one gives to the ability one has to give," said Martin Cohn, a spokesman for the Catalogue for Philanthropy, a Boston-based nonprofit that publishes a directory of nonprofit organizations.

Using that standard, the 10 most generous states were, in descending order, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Utah, South Carolina and West Virginia.

The 10 stingiest, starting from the bottom, were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Minnesota, Colorado, Hawaii and Michigan.

But a study by the Boston Foundation concluded that the index presents an undeserved image of New England as a region made up of Yankee skinflints.

"If everyone in Massachusetts gave 100 times as much to charity as we do today and everything else remains the same, we wouldn't get above the bottom half of the chart," said David Trueblood, a spokesman for the foundation. "And no matter what Mississippi did, it couldn't fall below 22nd or 23rd."

The foundation proposed an alternate measure of generosity based on each state's share of overall charitable contributions and income, adjusted for differences in taxes and living costs. Using that methodology, Massachusetts' generosity ranking last year would be 11th, instead of 49th.

Another new study, conducted by The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University on behalf of a group of New England sponsors, also boosts the case for residents of the six-state region.

That study, which supplements IRS data with a survey of representative households, found that individuals in New England give less, on average, to charity than people in other regions, but that the percentage of New Englanders who do contribute is higher than the national average. It also found that contributors in New England tend to favor secular, rather than religious, causes.

Cohn said he was disappointed that the Boston Foundation chose to attack the index without understanding that its purpose is to promote discussion about philanthropy and that it never sought to hang a label on any state.

Trueblood said he wanted to move the discussion away from rankings and toward ways to get people to be more generous.

Excuse me, but I don't believe this. If the IRS is the measuring stick, then that only reveals what people SAY they give. This data must be old.

Since Texas has offered to take up the slack for the thousands of Katrina victims when the federal aid runs out, I would say Texas is one of the most generous states. I don't see that on the list. Remember, James, how the data was captured and who it was captured from - that makes a huge difference in the outcome of the study. Even so, it was interesting, and I'm glad you brought it up.

Uncle

You're absolutely right, Uncle. The index used by the IRS in compiling this data was based on average adjusted gross incomes and the value of itemized charitable donations reported to the Internal Revenue Service on 2003 tax returns.

If we were to look at 2005 and take into consideration all the charitable help that Texas has given to the Katrina victims, Texas would no doubt be placed on top of the list. Your state (particularly the city of Houston) was first and foremost in helping out the Katrina victims. The IRS study is also flawed in the sense that many of us donate to numerous charities without ever reporting it (sometimes not eligible) on our 1040 forms.

 

[jimmoyer]

This brings up the old issue of private charity vs government aid, and eventually even the issue of comparing foreign aid among the nations of the world.

First private charity overwhelms any government aid.

Secondly the comparison of foreign aid given by the goverments of the world pale in such a puny way to wealth provided by free global commerce.

 

[tracy]

I didn't itemize on my tax returns, so this method of calculation is clearly flawed. Could just mean that the bible belters want their tax deductions more than the rest of us. I'm just not organized enough to keep track of every receipt I get. I live in California and have seen a lot of charitable acts, especially right after 2004's asian tsunami and hurricane Katrina this year. I have found private citizens are mostly generous and kind.

Although I generally don't like the "I gave more than you did" people, some competition can be fun and useful. At our hospital we competed to see who could raise the most money for relief work after the tsunami. My unit kicked labor and delivery's butt No one could turn us down when we pointed out that our unit's honor was at stake against those L&D queens. One doc even promised to match whatever we raised (I doubt he thought that would mean as much as it did, but he kept his word!).

 

[peapod]

Ya, you gotta give those sneaky bible thumper fundies credit :roll: :roll:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/1/172042/0238

 

[gopher]

Just because someone reports such donations on their tax returns does not mean that they actually donated those sums of money. As a rule, the higher the claimed amount of cash givings, the less likely that a claimant made those gifts and that's why the government disallows such claims in audits.

As a former IRS agent I know that better than anyone.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: US Bible Belt Residen

Ah, so citizens of red states are more likely to cheat on their taxes. Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

 

[unclepercy]

Re: RE: US Bible Belt Residents the Most Charitable Countryw

Just because someone reports such donations on their tax returns does not mean that they actually donated those sums of money. As a rule, the higher the claimed amount of cash givings, the less likely that a claimant made those gifts and that's why the government disallows such claims in audits.

As a former IRS agent I know that better than anyone.

So you agree with my comment. I knew it was true, because back when I was in college, we dissected a study about a phone survey where women vs. men were questioned about charitable donations. Although the women SAID they gave more, they actually gave less (in this one study). What people say and what they do can be two different things.

Uncle

 

[Nascar_James]

Re: RE: US Bible Belt Residen

Ah, so citizens of red states are more likely to cheat on their taxes. Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

Not so Rev. You forget that Gopher lives in the state of Minnesota, a blue state. Thus when working for the IRS, he was probably processing blue state 1040's (tax returns).

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: US Bible Belt Residen

I don't forget anything, James. An IRS guy just pointed out that people cheat on their taxes by claiming extra charitable donations. You pointed out that red states claim more charitable donations than other states. That would indicate that more people in red states cheat on their taxes by claiming extra charitable donations.