Liberals are CHEAP!

[DVO]

"You people" lol. Got me sized up, uh?

I'm a libertarian agnostic, does that change things for you?

In general, liberals look to the state to solve problems. Conservatives, most of whom are religious, look to God for answers.

You see no correlation between the secularization of Europe and the massive, core belief of most of its populace that the government will take care of everything? Did people feel that way when religion was predominant?

I think there's a connection there (obviously not true in every case).

People have an innate need to look for answers to life and society's problems. When religion goes, something is going to replace it.

[kidpokeher]

[ QUOTE ]

This is about religion, not politics.

[/ QUOTE ]

From your article:

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this news... their "test" to see who is cheaper is ridiculous. In the same vein they should see who is "cheaper": The white Jew or the black baptist. We will set up a salavtion army bucket at a bank in New York and one at a Waffle House in Atlanta .

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

"...you go past that second Waffle House, thas where them REAL niggas at, them REAL niggas..." -Ludacris-

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is this news... their "test" to see who is cheaper is ridiculous. In the same vein they should see who is "cheaper": The white Jew or the black baptist. We will set up a salavtion army bucket at a bank in New York and one at a Waffle House in Atlanta .

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

"...you go past that second Waffle House, thas where them REAL niggas at, them REAL niggas..." -Ludacris-

[/ QUOTE ]

just ask John "Waffle House" Kerry

[nef]

[ QUOTE ]
Do they include religious orginizations in the "charity" category-- ie churches, synagouges, the televangilists?

If so, then it would make sense that the religious give more to "charity" than the nonreligious too.


Since liberalism is liberals' religion, do they include campaign contributions? (Conservatives would win here too)

[ QUOTE ]

The reasoning that strikes me as likely true is that libs assume their good votes for huge government and the nanny state provide for the people in need and additional personal charity is not needed.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]



The author was interviewed on Michael Medved's radio show a few weeks back. The author was asked all of these obvious types of questions about the data. He basically said that controlling for all of the variables like religion, income, etc. conservatives give more. Including giving more money to non-church charities and also volunteering more time in the community as well, this included things like PTA etc.

He also gave a pretty good reason why donations to churches shouldn't be so easily dismissed as worthless, but I don't remember what he said. The author came across as genuine and intelligent. I don't have much interest in this so I doubt I'll read the book.

[neverforgetlol]

More money or more percentage of their income?

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The government over the last 6 years seems bigger than it ever has been in my short life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry about that. I was able to help elect many Republicans but no conservatives. I'm unsure how to change this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vote Libertarian. Or vote Constitution if you really want conservatives. :P

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The government over the last 6 years seems bigger than it ever has been in my short life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry about that. I was able to help elect many Republicans but no conservatives.

[/ QUOTE ]
How exactly did you help elect many republicans?

[moorobot]

I suppose the best thing I can say for liberals is this:

Conservatives have a tendency to believe that private charity should do much of the work that liberals believe should be funded via the gov't.

Now, fairness and reciprocity are a big part of the reason why liberals believe the government should pay for this.

Fairness: many reason that it is unfair to an extent for individual wealthy people to provide something to the poor when other, similarly situated wealthy people are not. Hence, it is ethically better for these things to be paid for by the government than for them to be paid for by some individuals.

Reciprocity: Many people think that if they are going to pay for social causes while they are well off, it should be guranteed that should they ever become "down on their luck" that they as well will be helped out by others.

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is about religion, not politics.

[/ QUOTE ]

From your article:




[/ QUOTE ]

Why is this so hard for some people? Conservatism or liberalism does not have a large statistical affect on charitable giving. Religion does. Religious people vote more conservive, so it APPEARS like conervatives donate more based on ideology. That is a correlation, not a causation. The causation is religion, NOT conservatism. The relvent question is "why do religious people donate more", not "why do conservatives donate more." The answer to that last question is because they are more religious! Can someone teach a statistics 101 course for the right-wingers?