Monday, August 20, 2012

Another Take on Giving

Since I posted about "How America Gives" earlier today, the World Wide Web has been awash in "analyses" and "commentary." One thing seems to me to be conspicuously missing. 

One of the limitations of the survey is its reliance of data from Schedule A, itemized deductions. I see this as unavoidable and, in all but the most uncommon circumstances, as not being especially consequential. Another limitation is the complete lack of knowledge of the recipients of charitable giving at every level (nationally, state, locale). Again, unavoidable given the nature of the data set, but that shouldn't stop us from putting on our thinking caps.

Most striking to the pundits, et al. is the relatively high proportion of discretionary income given to charity by folks making  $50,000 - 99,000 versus those in higher brackets. Religion vs. Godless greedy bastards? Conservationism vs. Liberal greedy bastards? Rural vs. Godless Liberal greedy City Mice? To be sure, there are many correlations to explore before anyone should start talking about causality.

Here's one-- one which my father often said-- I haven't seen mentioned: "There but for the Grace of God go I."

http://www.cherylteague.net/images/disasters.gif

Severe storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes account for nearly one-half of all disasters in the United States. Floods, a probable consequence of those storms, account for-- what would you say?-- 3/4 of 1/2? 

Big rain events create disaster.

And where do folks who give live? 







Note the correlation between regions of the country prone to severe storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes with those that are a dark shade of purple. 

My hypothesis is this. Those with the least available to give in these states give to food drives, local disaster funds, even local branches of the American Red Cross because it is the right thing to do, because they know Bubba, Bubbette and the youngin's can't wait for the federal red tape to be rolled out, and because it is in their enlightened self-interest to do so.

There but for Fortune go I.

Hey! It's a testable hypothesis.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Be nice. Nothing inappropriate, please.