U.S. Unemployment Rate Rises to 9.6%

kokonut said:
Giving%20among%20religious%20versus%20secular%20people-2.jpg





A Nation of Givers — The American, A Magazine of Ideas

:hmm:
Click to expand...
Never disputed the Conservative vs Liberal aspect. Liberals are cheap. I was disputing the rich vs poor.
 
TXgolfer said:
:lol: geez.

My accountant didn't need a grant to learn his new skill set.
Click to expand...
Wow. He must have been fortunate to receive training. I note that a lot of posters use examples of people they helped or worked with. An interesting connection there.
 
saywhatkid said:
No idea. Ask the people that used the Dept of Labor statistics to make the graph. I believe they are credited on the bottom. There are several more articles, but I felt posting a graph would suffice. I could post more articles, but you would dispute the source, the results, etc. Why bother? FoxNews would not issue a report of this nature unless it painted a different picture. So there you have it, another slanted result from MSM.
Click to expand...

Were they single persons donating? As income rise so does the size of a family versus singles. As with a bigger family, less money available for donation is a factor to consider as well.
 
saywhatkid said:
Wow. He must have been fortunate to receive training. I note that a lot of posters use examples of people they helped or worked with. An interesting connection there.
Click to expand...

The value of networking and knowing who to contact.
 
kokonut said:
Were they single persons donating? As income rise so does the size of a family versus singles. As with a bigger family, less money available for donation is a factor to consider as well.
Click to expand...
Again, I did not create the graph. I did not analyze the Dept of Labor data. I am just the messenger. But if you think the size of a family justifies less giving, when the top group is averaging an income of $158,000, based on number of kids, then those people better stop reproducing. :giggle:
 
Q. Aren’t people who favor social spending just as charitable as people who give money to charities?

A. It depends. Many Europeans feel that they “give” through their taxes, and in some European countries they have the high taxes and generous social welfare benefits to show for it. This argument doesn’t work so well in America, however, because we don’t have the same redistributive policies.

In America, $1 given privately tends to increase GDP by about $15—an excellent rate of return by any standard.

About 80 percent of American liberals say they think the government should “do more” to reduce income inequality, versus just 27 percent of American conservatives. This is another reason, besides religion, liberals in America give less than conservatives. For example, in 1996, people who believed the government should not take greater measures to reduce income inequality gave, on average, four times as much money to charity each year as those who believed the government should equalize incomes more. This result persists even after correcting for other demographics. It even holds for all sorts of nonmonetary giving. For example, people who stated in 2002 that they thought the government was “spending too little money on welfare” were less likely than those saying the government is “spending too much money on welfare” to give food or money to a homeless person.
Click to expand...

A Nation of Givers — The American, A Magazine of Ideas
 
If this happened under a Republican president, you would be crying foul against the Dems saying they are at fault for blocking every vote causing the unemployment rate to go up. Pointing fingers again, I concur.

This is just a series of events under nobody's control. However, despite the unemployment rate, several of my friends are finding jobs. Odd, isnt it?
 
So, the $860 billion dollar Stimulus Package should have not take place?
 
kokonut said:
No percentages were given on income of $158,000 though.

Cost of Raising Kids Table: Family & College - MSN Money
Click to expand...

OK, let's play the shell game, shall we? I see it pretty clearly there on the graph; look for the word "Highest" and look below it. Annual average income: $158,000...check! They give 2.1% of their pretax income to charities. You can see that, I hope. I know you can read and understand a graph.

Good job of seizing the opportunity to keep the hammer down on Liberals. I even agreed with you that they are cheap, but you keep posting more of that same report, in increments. They keep their money because they are cheap. But so, in relation, are the wealthy.
 
saywhatkid said:
OK, let's play the shell game, shall we? I see it pretty clearly there on the graph; look for the word "Highest" and look below it. Annual average income: $158,000...check! They give 2.1% of their pretax income to charities. You can see that, I hope. I know you can read and understand a graph.

Good job of seizing the opportunity to keep the hammer down on Liberals. I even agreed with you that they are cheap, but you keep posting more of that same report, in increments. They keep their money because they are cheap. But so, in relation, are the wealthy.
Click to expand...

Um, I was trying to say that no average of $158,000 was shown in the link I gave, not about your graph but my link. The highest income it shows is "65,800 and over."
 
saywhatkid said:
OK, let's play the shell game, shall we? I see it pretty clearly there on the graph; look for the word "Highest" and look below it. Annual average income: $158,000...check! They give 2.1% of their pretax income to charities. You can see that, I hope. I know you can read and understand a graph.

Good job of seizing the opportunity to keep the hammer down on Liberals. I even agreed with you that they are cheap, but you keep posting more of that same report, in increments. They keep their money because they are cheap. But so, in relation, are the wealthy.
Click to expand...

These days having a combined income of over $100K doesnt buy a life of luxury due to taxes.
 
saywhatkid said:
OK, let's play the shell game, shall we? I see it pretty clearly there on the graph; look for the word "Highest" and look below it. Annual average income: $158,000...check! They give 2.1% of their pretax income to charities. You can see that, I hope. I know you can read and understand a graph.

Good job of seizing the opportunity to keep the hammer down on Liberals. I even agreed with you that they are cheap, but you keep posting more of that same report, in increments. They keep their money because they are cheap. But so, in relation, are the wealthy.
Click to expand...

Maybe they spend more money on their own kids rather than donate more money to charities?
 
kokonut said:
Maybe they spend more money on their own kids rather than donate more money to charities?
Click to expand...
They take care of their own. Let the others take care of their own. It is the mantra of the Republicans. We can stop now.
 
shel90 said:
These days having a combined income of over $100K doesnt buy a life of luxury due to taxes.
Click to expand...

That puts you in the 25% bracket.

Personal income tax rates will rise. The top income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate at which two-thirds of small business profits are taxed). The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15 percent. All the rates in between will also rise. Itemized deductions and personal exemptions will again phase out, which has the same mathematical effect as higher marginal tax rates. The full list of marginal rate hikes is below:

- The 10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%

- The 25% bracket rises to 28%

- The 28% bracket rises to 31%

- The 33% bracket rises to 36%

- The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

Higher taxes on marriage and family. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care tax credit will be cut.
Click to expand...
 
kokonut said:
Maybe they spend more money on their own kids rather than donate more money to charities?
Click to expand...

Having kids is EXPENSIVE! However, nobody knows what each family does with their money. Some families are private about how they handle their money so cant make any assumptions.
 
shel90 said:
Having kids is EXPENSIVE! However, nobody knows what each family does with their money. Some families are private about how they handle their money so cant make any assumptions.
Click to expand...

I already know that.
 
Back
Top