The rich give less as those with less give more

Published October 7, 2014

Editorial by News and Observer, October 6, 2014.

Here’s news to warm Scrooge’s heart. Americans who have the most are giving more – to themselves.

Even as the income inequality gap yawns wider, the wealthiest Americans have reduced the percentage of income they give to charity while the poor and middle class are giving more. Between 2006 and 2012, top earners reduced the percentage of income they gave to charity by 4.6 percent while those earning less than $100,000 donated 4.5 percent more of their income, according to an analysis of IRS data conducted by the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

The shift may not be as simple as a divergence between the stingy rich and the generosity of everyone else. For one, incomes of the nation’s highest earners have soared, meaning that even a cut in percentage can still produce an increase in dollars contributed. Donations from wealthier Americans increased $4.6 billion, adjusted for inflation, to $77.5 billion between 2006 and 2012, Forbes reported. However, the collective wealth of Americans in the Forbes 400 grew by $1.04 trillion in that period.

Some giving by the wealthy may be affected by changes in tax law or the rich may be giving from resources other than their incomes. Still, it’s discouraging that the bonanza enjoyed by the upper crust in a time of flat wages for the working class isn’t translating into giving a greater share to charity.

Now that many of the well-off regard paying taxes as a government confiscation rather than a civic duty, it’s not surprising that they may be less inclined to feel a charitable obligation to civic betterment or the needs of their fellow man.

Still, there is good and heartening news in the Chronicle’s report that those with less are giving more. That is the highest form of charity – to give from one’s need rather than from one’s excess. Perhaps the lean years since the Great Recession hit have reminded more Americans of their vulnerabilities and softened their attitudes toward others in need.

The Chronicle’s editor, Stacy Palmer, told Forbes that, “Lower and middle-income people know people who lost their jobs or are homeless, and they worry that they themselves are a day away from losing their jobs. They’re very sensitive to the needs of other people and recognize that these years have been hard.”

Read More NC SPIN >>

October 7, 2014 at 10:43 am
Norm Kelly says:

This post appeared in the N&D. They earned the name 'Noise & Disturber', it was just given to them. The headline of the article is shown to be false (a lie) when you read the details of the article. Just reading the headline could have the effect of some low-information/lib supporter saying to themselves, 'well of course. that just figures. those greedy rich bast--ds are all so selfish'.

But what does the detail of the article show? Somewhat the opposite of the headline. 'Donations from wealthier Americans increased $4.6 billion'. Who, outside of Washington, considers 4.6BILLION DOLLARS chump change? How many state agencies would love to have a 4.6BILLION DOLLAR budget? Charitable donations by 'the rich', that group most despised by libs, INCREASED by 4.6BILLION DOLLARS! This IS A GOOD THING regardless of how you look at it. Even if you are a die-hard, media-type lib, working for the N&D a 4.6BILLION DOLLAR increase is NOTHING to sneeze at. Did I miss something here? Was there a statement later that says the opposite and I just missed it? Nope. No contradictory statement anywhere else in the post. Simply a statement of fact that those hated, greedy, selfish 'rich' INCREASED THEIR CHARITABLE DONATIONS BY 4.6BILLION DOLLARS!

And how did Bill Clinton do with his charitable donations? Is he still donating his used underwear?

How about Joe 'gaffe' Biden? What's his charitable donations like?

How about George Soros? What are George's charitable donations like?

And the article also says that 'the rich' greedy bast--ds MAY have given money not part of their income. But there is no information available about this figure. So, without knowing the full story, you draw the conclusion that their donations went down, but by the percentage number only, not in actual dollars. The facts are not available, but you decide to draw a conclusion anyway.

Is this another lib divide & conquer issue? Nope. Can't be. Media types are not biased. Regardless of how many times they prove their bias, they still are not biased. They always present a fair & balanced story to every topic they cover; their personal opinions NEVER influence the content of their stories.

'Now that many of the well-off regard paying taxes as a government confiscation rather than a civic duty'. Not a single person, no conservative or Republican, has ever made this statement, hinted at this statement, or indicated that this was even close to true. Paying taxes IS a civic duty. For EVERY AMERICAN. Not just a select few Americans. There are 2 challenges with taxes today. Fist is that Washington has decided it has so much more responsibility than it actually has, that it takes money from people to give it to others who have NOT earned it. Washington spends money on stuff they should have nothing to do with. So it's fair to complain and try to work against what's going wrong with Washington. The other aspect of taxation is that the lefties have convinced too many people that the central planners ACTUALLY DO have the right to pick & choose who gets to keep how much. It's MY MONEY not yours! Just because I make more does NOT mean you get to take more. By default if our tax rates are the same, but I make more, I PAY MORE. The socialist party has convinced people that this is wrong and should be changed BY FORCE of the central planners. It's not that I'm paying taxes. It's that the central planners believe they can penalize me for being successful. The challenge with people paying taxes is the desire to punish those who make more by having the government/central planners TAKE MORE! This is IMMORAL! Paying taxes is a civic duty of EVERYONE. Confiscating is WRONG! When you take money from me just because you want to is wrong, immoral, and should be illegal. 10% of a 'poor' persons income is much much much much less than 10% of a 'rich' persons income. When you make $12,000 and pay 10%, by default you pay LESS TAXES than someone who makes $120,000 and pays 10%. By what right do you claim that you should be allowed to confiscate 25% or 35% or more just because I earn more than YOU think I should be allowed to have? When you tax at such a high rate, without justification, then it is 'confiscation' or 'stealing'. Regardless of how much those words bother you, truth sometimes hurts. Get over it. Define 'their fair share' for us sometime. You would be the first lib to EVER define this. I expect libs never define 'their fair share' because it would turn off so many people, and show the lie of socialism to their supporters.