Discussion » Questions » Finance » Does giving increase with wealth or are those inclined to give going to do it regardless of their personal wealth?
Just Asking

Does giving increase with wealth or are those inclined to give going to do it regardless of their personal wealth?

Posted - March 28, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • Dear Just Asking,

    Each person is different of course, however the overall trend as I have seen it is:
    Those with the least personal wealth tend to be the most generous.

    The nearest I can come for documentation is the life of the Peace Pilgrim (1914-1982). Around the age of forty 1953 she gave away all her belongings except for her toothbrush, comb and tennis shoes, and spent the rest of her life walking across North America, total seven times. She lived her life as a peaceful presence in the McCarthy era, and her food and shelter came from people along the way who would offer.

    And for those 28 years of walking, she learned that it was the poor folk who gave the food and shelter, the wealthy much less often.
    So I think it is more your second option, those inclined to give do it regardless of their personal wealth.

      March 28, 2017 1:24 PM MDT
    7

  • 7939
    Interesting story. Thank you for sharing.
      March 28, 2017 4:03 PM MDT
    1

  • With such a cavalier attitude to possessions she may have been lucky not to have been dragged up before the House Committee. I believe Reagan, while he was still making B movies) was notorious for informing on his actor buddies who, he considered, showed leftist sympathy.
      March 28, 2017 4:55 PM MDT
    1

  • Dozy either I did not know that, about Reagan, or did not remember.
    To me, history is proving Reagan's presidency to fall disastrously short; and I voted for him, at least the first time, studying and trying hard.
    As I read JA question about 'protecting us from our own stupidity,' I wondered if an old-fashioned senate of wise folk could have protected the US from going down that route... blowing up into the Great Recession, and all... :) This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 28, 2017 7:35 PM MDT
      March 28, 2017 6:38 PM MDT
    1

  • Who knows, Virginia? Laissez faire may sound attractive but it's full of peril. 
      March 28, 2017 7:36 PM MDT
    1

  • 22891
    i think they do it regardless of their personal wealth
      March 28, 2017 1:54 PM MDT
    4

  • If we look to the past of the robber barons like Carnegie and Rockefeller giving extremely large sums of cash to the causes of the less fortunate was common and even looked at as an obligation by much of the wealthy.
    Something changed in the mid 20th century and cascaded and it does seem to follow the a line with increased social benefits from central government.  However I'm not so sure the change in culture will go back to the old ways now that it is the way it is.
      March 28, 2017 3:03 PM MDT
    3

  • The Gilded Age...recently I read Carnegie's little book, THE GOSPEL OF WEALTH.
    Intriguing observations, Glis.
      March 28, 2017 3:22 PM MDT
    1

  • These guy's were pretty damn shady  in other ways but just to be fair and honest.
      March 28, 2017 3:24 PM MDT
    1

  • 7939
    Were they the norm or the exception?
      March 28, 2017 4:05 PM MDT
    1

  • It  was kinda the norm from what I've always seen in history books.      Sure  it's a generalization.  Of course it is.  Charity was kind of a way of showing off for the time on top of being a moral obligation for good social graces in their own sphere.
    It's got to be said though that a lot of these guys didn't come from money either so that may have a lot to do with it. As for the showing off aspect. Land and building a castle mansion was a lot cheaper and that there wasn't the consumer good culture that gave them  multimillion dollar yachts and cars to show off with either.  So when they had money just sitting around it was just literally sitting around.

    Trying to repair their negative public image I'm sure played into it too.
      March 28, 2017 4:18 PM MDT
    4

  • 16794
    It does and it doesn't. The wealthy certainly have more opportunity, but altruism is innate - either you've got it or you don't. Those less fortunate definitely give a greater percentage of what they have - the widow's two mites.
      March 28, 2017 3:38 PM MDT
    3

  • 7939
    If you have any stats on that, I'd love to see them.
      March 28, 2017 4:07 PM MDT
    1

  • 34286
    Amen!
      March 28, 2017 5:12 PM MDT
    1

  • 34286
    When talking about  percentage of income giving poor people give more. Rich people give on average of 1.5% while poor people give an average of 3% of their income. 
    But when dealing with % you have to take into account someone who only makes $100 can give $1 and those making $1000 have to give $10 to give 1%, $100,000--$1000. So the more money a person makes it takes much to change the percentage rate.

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/2013/04/24/poor-middle-class-and-rich-who-gives-and-who-doesnt.html
      March 29, 2017 4:20 AM MDT
    0