The most rediculas thing from economic Advisors on TV

Mr. Brooks is Roman Catholic and politically independent, and has registered as both a Democrat and a Republican in the past decade. In an interview, he says he set out to write a book about values and philanthropy, with no hidden agenda.

He believes liberal Democrats must ignore their leaders who sometimes disdain charity, and demonstrate that the Democratic Party is still welcoming to people of faith, if they hope to prove that they are, in fact, the more compassionate party.

"This book is a call to action for the left, not a celebration of the right," Mr. Brooks says.
Click to expand...
I guess she didn't read that far.

Alan J. Abramson, director of the nonprofit-research program at the Aspen Institute, a Washington think tank, questions whether Mr. Brooks is putting too much stock in data on giving, which Mr. Abramson describes as "mushy." He notes that surveys on giving put the percentage of American households who give to charity at between 50 percent and 80 percent an incredibly wide range.

"If somebody called you up and asked you how much you gave last year, God knows what number you would pull out of the air," he says.

Mr. Brooks writes in the appendix that he tried to overcome this problem by using 15 sets of data, based on surveys conducted with individuals in person, over the phone, or through the mail. Every survey led to the same conclusions. "While individual surveys and populations might produce inaccuracies and biases, a large body of evidence is more trustworthy," he writes.

Mr. Abramson also argues that scholars will need to examine the data more closely to determine whether conservative and religious donors are more compassionate which doesn't necessarily follow from giving more.
Click to expand...
Sounded pretty thorough to me, but it is easier to just trash the messenger than to see the message. Like I said earlier, I was disappointed in my fellow non-believers for being tightwads.
 
LOL

I was going to leave everyone wondering, but not worth it...LOL

seriously, it is nothing.

I typed a long reply back to some stuff and then decided I am out of the thread....so I edited it all, put the * and just moved on.

nothing secret or black about it. :P :lol:
 
Oh, man! I went to bed last night thinking that it was a burp, lol.
:gig
 
WZ--That sounds like a really interesting study! I think even more interesting (geez! I am SO overusing that word lately!) would be WHAT motivates people to give. I don't even care what their religion, race, political background is. WHY do people give? That gets so much into emotion and personality, it would probably be a pretty challenging to actually get to the truth.

As for the accuracy of self reporting, I seriously could not come up with any accuracy at all how much I have given in the past year. I don't track it, my memory stinks, and a lot of it is donations of items that I don't get receipts for or think about the value of. I can see how studies based on self reporting could be wildly inaccurate. Plus, there's that thing about donating time. What is my time worth? How about yours?


Anyway, the OP was about how a person could find $ to save for retirement and other things when barely getting by himself. Omran, I might have already posted this and am not bothering to go back through the thread, but someone told me a long time ago to always "pay myself first." My retirement savings is an automatic withdrawal every month. I barely even remember it anymore. You just learn to live with out. Maybe for you, that's only $5/month, but if/when things get better you can keep ramping that up. Good luck!
 
me&thgals

great point. Pay yourself first. I live by that rule definitely!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Sister Sites

BackYardChickens.com
BackYardHerds.com
TheEasyGarden.com
Back
Top