How do conservatives give more to charity, when they complain so much about the poor?

Question

I've seen several people post one study that states that conservatives give more... but...

it doesn't really make any sense? the majority of conservatives I see on here, not only DON'T want to give to chairty, but basically seem to not care if poor people died?

yet, conservatives are the ones that give more to charity?

all I hear them say is "if they want it, work for it"... which I understand what they are saying, but I wouldn't think that person was exactly generous either?

and I know several conservatives and the majority of them seem to feel this way, not all... but most... maybe I just need to get out more?

I'm confused?

Answer 1

I've noticed when Democrats posts a statement or comment of humanity conservatives lay claim to it in another context.

It confuses honest peopleBecause it IS inconsistent with what they are really saying. Don't be confused, your observation is right on.

They speak with forked tongues - they do not want to help the unfortunate nor do they help them.

The stats they quote is probably business and not personally 'giving'. And it's done for tax benefits only.

Conservatives/republicans, especially those on y!A claim Democratic behavior and manner only because to claim who and what they really are is too awful even for them to own up to.

Answer 2

the article i found (George Will) fairly says figures are consistent with no count if a state is pink or blue. Then it talks concerning to the state's nicely-known income and charitable giving. What it would not help isn't any count if the persons doing the earning/giving are liberal or conservative. US information, in spite of the undeniable fact that, shows those with much less that $25,000 provide 4.7% of their income to charity and those with earning over $seventy 5,000 provide 2.4%. So ye,s conservatives can supply extra $$$, yet they make much less of a scarifice to realize this. additionally, charitable giving has many categories: addressing the desires of the undesirable, disabled, elderly; church homes (administration besides as missions); universities, libraries. paintings foundations/centers, etc. the 1st of those besides as missions are compassionate. the rest could be beneficiant, yet compassion isn't possibly an ingredient. and not lined is the time spent volunteering at nutrition pantries, food on Wheel, thrift shops, etc.

Answer 3

I have no problem helping people, or giving to charity. I've bent over backwards for my friend and my cousin for about a year now. Even though I'm attending college and barely have any money. It was very tough at first but they're both on their feet now, and it was all worth it! They were both at the bottom, but with some determination and hard work, they've succeeded. Unlike a lot of people who would rather just abuse the system and be lazy!

My problem is I don't want to be told or forced into giving my hard earned money away to someone. Especially when half the people on welfare are lazy slobs capable of work! Let ME choose who and when I want to give to charity!

Answer 4

If 10% of the average $907 that Americans spent on Christmas gifts went to children in need, 42 million children could be helped for an entire year according to statistics provided to me during an interview with World Vision.

This year, I conducted an experiment, and asked for donations to World Vision and Heifer.org instead of Christmas gifts. Many folks simply chose to give me gifts anyway, but several did make donations instead, resulting in $137 going to these charities.

I also have a website where I sell art to support these two fine charitable organizations. The next time you need art for your office, church, or home walls, please consider my website. My personal favorite of my own work is Sunset over Florence12. There are two other artists/photographers who are participating on my website with donated works.

http://finerworks.com/gallery.asp?U_ID=RLTabor

Best Regards,
Rick Tabor

Answer 5

I am a conservative, and i agree that poor people should be helped, its just if they are able to help them selves but are too lazy to do so then thats their problem. it amazes me to see some poeple on wellfare and they live in their crappy house, just sit there and do nothing, but they still have their sattilite tv! they are not willing it work so they leech off the tax payer and then spend $70 a month on tv!
thats the kind of people i don't like, or the people you see standing on the street corner with a sign that says "we'll work for food." i say go find a job at mcdonalds, start working, don't just stand on the street.

Answer 6

Most cons believe there is a time and place for charity. To help someone who is struggling through a rough time, absolutely!

But to make living off charity a perpetual way of life, no,

Answer 7

You obviously misunderstand the conservative mindset. They are extremely ready and willing to support those truly in need. They draw the line in supporting those that feed off the system...those that can work and support themselves, but don't.

Answer 8

What these conservatives don't state is that this same study points out the fact that they give to charities which they benefit from, while on the other hand liberals give to charities that help everyone.

Answer 9

Well you make a good point.....Seems some Conservatives really begrudge having to give.....It would be better if they didn't give at all and let us pick up their slack....I just wish they would stop moaning about it.....No one is holding a gun to their heads to give to others less fortunate.....And as far as taxes, write your politicians, they are the one's who control the monies.....NOT THE POOR....

Answer 10

I'd like to give a lot to poor people, a lot of job applications and a ball point pen.