Give Your Wealth Away: An Argument For a Secular Tithe
Published on - December 13th, 2009 (by J.D. Roth) This is a guest post from Sierra Black, a long-time GRS reader and the author of ChildWild, a blog where she writes about frugality, sustainable living, and getting her kids to eat kale. Previously at Get Rich Slowly, Black told us about sweating the big stuff and the pitfalls of buying in bulk.
My mother’s family is Catholic. They’re working class people from Buffalo: nurses, drugstore clerks, steel mill workers. Even though they never had a lot of dollars, they always gave 10% of what they had to the church. Like taxes, that 10% was just something they paid out before spending a dime on themselves.
As an adult I became the first college graduate in my family and adopted the position most of my educated, liberal peers seemed to hold toward charity: give a little, when you can, and feel guilty about not doing it most of the year.
For most of my 20s, I was living beyond my means. With every dollar being spent before it was earned, giving even a few dollars felt like a huge pinch in my messy budget. I was haphazard and frankly not very generous with my giving.
Overall, liberals tend to give less to charity than conservatives. Religious people like the ones I grew up with give more than my secular humanist friends. The working poor are, as a class, the most generous group in America, reliably giving away 4.5% of their income. The middle class are the least generous, giving just 2.5% on average.
In addition to making me and my friends look bad in the conservative press, statistics like that are, as George Will put it, “hostile witnesses” to the idea that “bleeding-heart liberals” actually care more about the poor and disadvantaged than our conservative counterparts.
According to the American Enterprise Institute, the single biggest predictor of a person’s charitable giving is religion. People who go to church every week give more money, more consistently.
I think it’s time to make secular tithing a middle-class trend. Those of us who don’t go to church every Sunday may not have the easy, deeply ingrained tradition of giving my great-grandmother had when she put her little envelope in the offering plate each week. That’s no excuse for not giving our share. It’s not right for the affluent and secure to let responsibility for maintaining the social safety net rest on the backs of those most likely to need it.
Last year, when I got serious about straightening out my spending habits, I wanted to make charitable giving, like saving, a key part of my financial future.
I adopted something akin to the “balanced money formula”. Instead of allocating 30% to wants, though, I drew up my formula like this: 50% for needs, 10% for charity, 20% for savings and 20% for wants.
My money is not balanced. I’m working hard to repay a pile of credit card debt and continuing to fine tune a frugal lifestyle. My needs and debts suck up most of our income. Because all the “extra” money goes into savings and debt repayment, I’m still living as if we were on the edge financially. Giving hurts. I do it anyway. Every week.
I’m not tithing yet, but I am moving towards it. Here’s how:
- As our income increases, I spend the new money in a “balanced” way. A year ago, my husband and I were living on one salary — his. As I’ve added income to our household with my freelance work, I’ve allocated 10% of those dollars toward charitable giving, 20% to savings, 20% wants and 50% to needs.
- As our debts decrease, I’m beginning to split our debt snowball. Snowballing debts is great. I’ve seen some people argue for splitting the money that’s freed up when a debt is paid off between paying down the next debt and adding to an emergency fund. I’m doing this with giving too. This month, I pay off a credit card that had a $35/month payment. I’ll put $3.50 into my charity fund, $7 into savings and the rest toward the next debt I’m attacking. I do this with frugal changes too: split the saved money between charity, savings and debt reduction.
- I make the giving automatic. Remembering to do stuff is not my strong suit. To stay consistent with my giving, I’ve signed up for recurring automatic withdrawals from my bank account. There are organizations, like Just Give, that will help you coordinate automated or one time gifts to many different organizations.
- I’m teaching my kids to give. My kids use jars to split their allowance into categories for giving, saving and spending. They’re too young to tell yet what lasting impact that might have, but I’m hoping it will get them into the habit of giving some of their money away every time they get paid. A habit it took me 30 years to grow into.
- Giving small counts big. Charities can use their membership rolls and total numbers of donors to solicit large grants from individuals and foundations, and to earn matching grants. Because of this, the difference between giving $10 to a charity and giving them nothing is a lot bigger than the difference between $10 and $20. I make a lot of small donations to different organizations I like, to spread out my impact.
There are many good organizations doing vital work in the world that depend on charitable gifts to run their operations. These range from the Red Cross to the World Food Program to local groups.
The end of the year is often a time charities need dollars most. To encourage holiday season giving, many have created fun holiday gift programs. My favorite is Heifer International’s famous gift catalog, which lets you “give” a cow or a beehive or another livestock animal to a family in the developing world. In reality, of course, what you give them is the money to run their organization, which then distributes livestock to needy families at a local level. It’s fun to read their catalog though, and Heifer has one of the lowest overhead ratios of all the large charities.
In closing, a note: Expressing concern about what a charity is going to do with your money is a terrible excuse for not giving. Very few charities are outright frauds, and even the inefficient ones will put more of your dollars toward a good cause than your bank will. If you want to be sure you’re getting the most bang for your charitable buck, though, you can investigate organizations at a charity watchdog site before giving.
Note: Get Rich Slowly does not take a stand on religious or political issues. Respectful discussion of these topics is fine; please keep the comments up to their usual high-quality standards.
GRS is committed to helping our readers save and achieve your financial goals.Savings interest rates may be low, but that’s all the more reason to shop for the best rate.Find the highest savings interest rate from Ally Bank, Capital One 360, Everbank, and more.
This article is about Giving
Disclaimer: This content is not provided or commissioned by American Express. Opinions expressed here are author's alone, not those of American Express, and have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by American Express. This site may be compensated through American Express Affiliate Program.
Discover is a paid advertiser of this site. Reasonable efforts are made to maintain accurate information. See the Discover online credit card application for full terms and conditions on offers and rewards.
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES



Great article. I think giving is important whether you have a religious affiliation or not. It is a good reminder that life is not all about you, and that you should put others first.
loading....
I’m really not surprised. Most Republicans are from the south and I’ve found them extremely friendly and accommodating. It doesn’t surprise me that they are the most charitable too. As an aside, hopefully Obama decides not to go through with the Charity tax. I’m sure he can find better ways for reducing our deficit.
loading....
This is a great piece.
One of the “truths” I’ve believed for a while, and that has only been reinforced over time, is that “you get good at what you practice.” It’s very easy to put giving off, saying “I’ll pay off my debts, and THEN I’ll give to charities / nonprofits.” But once you’ve paid off your debts, it’s easy to think “well, I’ve worked hard to pay off my debts, I should spend this money on myself.” A few months later, you think “Well, they’ve gotten along without my donations; why should I start now?”
In truth, donating money — whether through a normal tithe or through a “secular tithe” — is a real sacrifice. But by getting in the habit now, you’re able to develop a pattern around it and to build in a lifestyle of generosity … and you’ll get good at what you practice.
Thanks again for this.
loading....
Excellent post, Sierra. I appreciate both your research on giving in the U.S., and your action plan for training your children in giving. One note: I’ve read that the great majority of giving in the U.S. is to churches. As a faithful churchgoer myself, I know that the bulk of church budgets go to overhead (salaries, building expenses, etc.) with a relatively small percentage of church budgets going to missions and outreach that help the poor. Conservatives go to church in much greater numbers than liberals. Dollar for dollar, conservative giving probably contributes much more to upholding the places they enjoy attending than to relieving suffering, while liberal giving tends to invest in helping the poor, without personal benefit to the giver beyond knowing he or she has helped.
That’s not to say we shouldn’t give to churches (I do, as well as to the poor). We should just remember that not all giving is alike.
loading....
An easy way to make donations automatic is to talk to your payroll department. I work in Finance and there are several people at our company that have charitable donations taken directly off their pay before it’s even deposited. Finance also mails the cheque to the charity with everyone’s name and the donation amount (ie – Dear Charity, Please find enclosed a cheque for XX dollars. This is a donation from John ($X) and Sally ($X). Thanks, Payroll at This Company).
It doesn’t have to be a lot either. Some of the cheques we cut are for $10 or $15. Who knows – your payroll department might already be doing this for some of your coworkers.
loading....
Alison, you made some statements about the giving of conservatives and liberals. Can you please provide the data to back up your statements?
loading....
I understand that living within your means is a key factor in avoiding a financial crisis. If you feel helping others is a priority then make it fit in your budget.
Taking a “loan” in order to give away part of it doesn’t seams right for me. What makes sense is the discipline to build a budget and work towards it. If you can do it you can begin giving away. I suggest starting with thinking about you, then about others.
loading....
This was something that I found to be a major difference when I moved from the UK to Texas. In the US, help for the needy seemed to be mainly distributed by various churches (paid for via tithes, etc); in the UK, there is a greater amount of government aid (paid for by taxes).
I guess that it depends on whether you expect help for the needy to require a religious component, or whether it is simply part of what makes a civilised nation…
loading....
I’m sorry, but I think how efficient the charities are matters A LOT. I don’t want to give to feel better about myself, I want to give to help someone.
loading....
I can understand why some people would be reluctant to give to a charity, wondering how much money really gets used in helping people. We give to a local non-profit: Dove Lewis. It’s an emergency clinic for animals. I can see my dollars at work and that just motivates me to give more to help them continue their great work.
loading....
Wonderful article. This is very timely, because I just wrote a check that I didn’t necessarily want to write to my church to give this morning, but I knew it was the right thing to do. Giving hurts in many ways. My husband and I are debt free except for our mortgage, and we have a decent emergency fund. You would think at this point we would be more willing to give, but alas it doesn’t work that way. Now I want to get more and more in savings and retirement. It’s hard to step back and think of those around me who are in need.
Alison @#4 bring up a good point about churches, namely that they are not true charities. This is certainly true, and most churches don’t do a fabulous job with benevolences. I am lucky to be in a church that gives a large percentage to various charities. But I also think my church ministers to its members and provides not only spiritual guidance but oftentimes practical help. But we must also not forget that charities often have large overhead, and sometimes when I go to look at the CEO’s salary, I am appalled. But Sierra is absolutely right that suspicious of where funds are going is overall a terrible excuse not to give.
I grew up in a very conservative household in which my parents gave over 10% to the church and various charities. When I look at how little I give to my church and to charity, I often am privately ashamed.
loading....
@ Melinda “I suggest starting with thinking about you, then about others.”
I think the point that Sierra is trying to make is that if you start thinking about yourself first and then others, most people will never get to the part about thinking of others.
Great post.
loading....
Sierra provides a lot of good practical advice for including charitable donations as part of the family budget. There’s always the push of the heart and values against the pull of ensuring one’s own financial security. We are currently unchurched, and make a conscious effort to contribute to and volunteer for organizations we care about throughout the year. We intentionally teach our children about the different kinds of need that exist, and talk about how to help. This year, we are fortunate to have what we need with enough left over to share, and we try to make the kids aware of that.
That said . . .
(Sigh.) I would have loved this article without the liberal/conservative, secular/religious stuff based Brooks’ book. I’m sure you’ll get lots of links and comments by espousing Brooks’ opinions and embracing the “surprise”, but I hope your message doesn’t get lost.
Allison@4 took good care of my thoughts about correlating religon with charitable giving. Giving 10% of your money to a church is “charitable giving” according to the IRS, but very little of it leaves the congregation to provide help to the needy outside its doors. I have similar issues with donations to non-profits such as arts and educational organizations that directly or indirectly benefit the donor. Are these really “charity” in the way most people use the term?
loading....
Melinda – look at Bob Schumann’s Blog post about a “habit” of saving 10% of your income. I believe you will find it relevant to your idea of avoiding a financial crisis. (http://www.peoplesfinancialadvisor.com/personalfinance/?p=112)
loading....
I think that giving to charitable causes is laudable. When such charity is done with hard-earned money, it is double laudable. However, I also feel that many people in USA do not look at the efficacy of their charitable giving. Many charities have huge overheads because they are not efficient in their operations. So, while we denigrate taxes (due to inefficiencies of the government), we continue to invest in poorly performing charities.
And regarding the liberal/conservative comparison on giving – How do the numbers turn out when you add in the taxes that they give? I live in California and I pay a lot in taxes and I pay gladly (by not moving out of state) because I think the services provided by the state are important.
loading....
Perhaps it’s because I (sadly) live in a country where charity is pretty much non-existent and almost all aid is paid by taxes, but I have to agree with Melinda.
Giving to charity instead of using the money to paying off debt is quite similar to taking out a loan and spend it on charity. It is very charitable but a bit too much.
I give a bit to the few charities that I trust and would like to give more, but most of my money are going into paying back the student loan. If I also did tithing there would be less than 40% left after taxes, and I can’t survive on that, especially not as long as there is a 25 % VAT on all purchases.
loading....
Mint.com just had an infographic on this same topic:
“Charity: Who Cares”:
http://www.mint.com/blog/trends/charity-who-cares/
loading....
This is my first time commenting at GRS, and I can’t believe it’s to express disappointment in a post.
I fully agree with the notion that charitable giving is important, whether, as previous commenters noted, it’s accomplished through taxation or tithing.
However, your disclaimer says you don’t take a position on religious or political issues, and I can’t help but feel this post doesn’t meet that standard.
By advocating or applauding tithing to churches, many of which do take political positions by financially and logistically supporting ballot measures (e.g. the Mormon church’s financial support of anti-Prop 8 organizations in California), you are, by extension, labeling that “charitable work.” It’s not; it’s thinly veiled discrimination.
loading....
I don’t give money while I am trying to pay off my debt, but I do give my time. It may not help pay overhead costs, but I definitely think that I help people directly. In my mind, giving doesn’t just have to be financial in order to make a difference.
loading....
Overall, liberals tend to give less to charity than conservatives. Religious people like the ones I grew up with give more than my secular humanist friends. The working poor are, as a class, the most generous group in America, reliably giving away 4.5% of their income. The middle class are the least generous, giving just 2.5% on average.
In addition to making me and my friends look bad in the conservative press, statistics like that are, as George Will put it, “hostile witnesses” to the idea that “bleeding-heart liberals” actually care more about the poor and disadvantaged than our conservative counterparts.
According to the American Enterprise Institute, the single biggest predictor of a person’s charitable giving is religion. People who go to church every week give more money, more consistently.
What is this?
loading....
Great post. As a fundraiser I can say that there is definitely what we call a “culture of philanthropy”; in other words, it is much easier for me to get a donation from someone who gives to other causes than it is to get someone who doesn’t give at all to become philanthropic.
Here’s Forbes recent listing of the most efficient large charities: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/14/charity-09_The-200-Largest-U.S.-Charities_FundRaiseEff.html.
While a $10 gift is commendable, in the case of most charities that won’t cover the mailings you’ll receive. If you have small amounts to give, it’s better to choose one charity and give $100 than to give $10 to 10 different organizations. Just a thought.
loading....
Giving is one of the topics that doesn’t seem to get much attention these days. It’s really great to remind us how important it is. They say that it is good to give away 10%.
It’s also wonderful to see how you are planning and using your rising income effectively. If we don’t plan, we tend to just spend it on stuff we want!
loading....
Yesterday, while editing chapter 11 in my book, I sat at a table in a nearby coffee shop. At the table next to me were three older men. They were talking about religion. One was a Catholic, one was a Lutheran, and one was a United Methodist. They didn’t agree much on doctrine. That didn’t matter. They had a fine discussion of faith. Midway through their discussion, the two young adults at the next table over joined in. They were atheists, though they’d both been raised in a church. The five of them had a lively, intelligent conversation without calling names and without making judgments.
Let’s do the same here.
Statements of fact are not judgments. I think Sierra did an admirable job keeping the tone of this post as neutral as possible while still advocating her main point. (In order to make her point, she had to use some numbers.)
Folks, I’m not joking: I’m going to wield a heavy hand to keep the political/religion debate from getting out of hand. It’s fine to discuss politics and religion in calm, rational way. Merely mentioning the subjects is not the same as taking sides. Let’s keep the level of discourse here the same as it always is — not like what you see on politically-loaded sites and shows.
loading....
Thank you, JD! I’m one of those that get turned off when the discussions get religious/political.
loading....
In the post, Sierra linked to the CSMonitor, but the article doesn’t seem to be working. For those interested in finding charities to donate to, Charity Navigator has some useful Top Ten lists. For example, their list of 10 Highly-Rated Charities with Low Paid CEOs shows that a number of nonprofit CEOs take a very modest income … including the CEO of the International Children’s Fund, who takes a salary of $28,000. There are more “Top 10″ (and a few “Bottom 10″) lists that you can find here.
loading....
I very much appreciate this post. There have been some comments recently about giving & it’s a fascinating topic both financially and at a human level (aside from the religion question, which can be a distraction).
Like some of the other posters, I don’t give as much as I would like, but I do give and regularly, to charities that I have chosen for how their values fit with what I value. Living in Canada, I think that we are extremely fortunate compared to the majority of the world, and I think acknowledging this and sharing what I have received helps to make me more aware of how fortunate I am and more the kind of person I choose to be. Even if I owe money, I have food, housing, and the possibility of earning more to pay off my debts. This is due to where I was born, the family I grew up in, my education, etc.
Gratitude (whether to the Universe or God or Fortune or whatever) makes me see the positive more in my everyday life, and part of becoming that person I want to be is giving to others.
The idea that giving money when when one has debts is borrowing for charity is a bit of a false dichotomy. I think it’s like JD’s various postings about sunk costs. The money I already owe is a sunk cost – I can’t change it now. But if I earn $100.00, I can choose whether to put 5 or 10 towards giving, or whether to put it all towards my debts. I see that as very different from going out and getting a new loan in order to give to charity.
The key question for me is what it does to my outlook on the world to be someone who gives or to be someone who is focussed so much on myself (or in such a difficult situation) that I don’t share with others. It’s very much a personal choice, but for me, the giving has rewards in terms of personal development and outlook on life. Thanks for this post, JD & Sierra – I’m looking forward to the conversation. (side note – unfortunately your link to the charity watchdog article didn’t work for me…)
loading....
Expressing concern about what a charity is going to do with your money is a terrible excuse for not giving.
That depends. If you’re giving your money for the sake of feeling better about yourself, then it’s true, and there’s no difference between giving your money to the Mormon church (while gifts to the church counted as charitable donations, the money I gave to the other side of the Prop 8 debate was counted as political, and thus non-charitable) or to PETA or to missionary work overseas or to the American Cancer Society or even to that guy with the sign on the streetcorner on your way to work. My family participates in a sport group that runs an annual charity drive, but we specifically sit it out because it benefits Autism Speaks, which I cannot in good conscience support. We’d rather (and we do) give money directly to the other charities on the list, even with overhead and all the rest, than to groups we know will use our money, and the money we’ve helped raise from others, to work against people and things we value. Acknowledging who and what a particular charity supports is an enormous part of making the decision of whether to give them money.
loading....
If you’re suspicious about big organizations, donate to the local ones. Do you know anybody who works for a local charity? I give my 8/1000 (in Italy, a part of taxes that has to be donated) to the local organization for mentally handicapped children, since I know people who are involved. I also go to some of their shows, it’s fun and I can give an offer directly to them each time.
loading....
“Very few charities are outright frauds, and even the inefficient ones will put more of your dollars toward a good cause than your bank will.”
This is an ignorant statement, at best.
Giving to inefficient charities is just giving to make yourself feel good. It does little to help anyone.
If frugal in your habits, that must carry over to charity. A non-frugal, inefficiently run charity is a very bad thing to support. It’s throwing your money in the garbage.
loading....
Thanks Sean, I like very much the post you gave me. I also run a Free Financial Assessment there. Pretty cool
http://www.peoplesfinancialadvisor.com/
loading....
I can’t believe this post has 29 comments already at 8am on a Sunday morning…
I’m not sure what’s going on with the charity watchdog link. I updated it to point to the Google cache of the article. Not a perfect solution, but it’ll have to do…
loading....
I’m curious as to why the Christian version of planned giving (i.e. tithing) is always portrayed as the ideal. Islam does it a little differently: giving 1/40th of your net worth (not your income, but including assets like jewelry, etc.) to charity each year (essentials like basic transportation and living costs aren’t included). So as you accumulate more wealth through your life, you’re giving more as a result.
When you’re just starting out, this 2.5% seems like it’s easier to fit into the budget. However, if you’re earning $100,000 a year and you’ve got $1,000,000 in assets, you’d be donating $25,000 a year instead of $10,000. I’m not sure how this compares over a lifetime.
I hope I’m not mistaken in describing this practice (if I am, please correct me!) I’d love to know how other religions promote charity.
loading....
I feel the title of this article indicates that we’ll be enlightened to the reasons why secular liberals should give, but I don’t feel it does that. I feel it says that those are the people that don’t give, and that they can by following this guideline. It doesn’t tell me why they should.
I suppose the argument is that some people are more fortunate than others, but natural law is that everyone deserves the same level of fortune, so we should redistribute our fortunes for equality. Does that sound about right? It also sounds like socialism to some degree.
I believe natural law, evolution and natural selection all fit nicely together. The survival of the fittest. We like to say that we believe we should help other humans and also take care of our planet, but the more we take care of humans, the more humans there are on this planet, and the more we wreak havoc on our planet. What if the right thing to do is to care more for the planet and less for our fellow humans?
I’m not saying I a firm believer of this perspective, but I offer it up for discussion, as I’d really like to hear the “why” behind secular tithe rather than the how.
If you’re curious about the above philosophy and want to hear a much better explanation of it, check out the book Ishmael by Daniel Quinn.
loading....
Ooh. Interesting, Jason B. It’s been a long time since I thought of Ishmael, but it does have certain personal finance implications, doesn’t it? At the very least, we could have a fantastic discussion of Leavers and Takers. I might put this on the list for a discussion topic during 2010…
loading....
My parents used to say that if we would all step up and give our 10% to local charities (not even churches, if you prefer) that the government could get out of the business of welfare and reduce the burden on our paychecks. I’m not sure the government will ever roll back ANY tax, but I’m a big believer in charity beginning at home (my local economy, not my personal economy) and not in Washington DC.
loading....
Honestly, I probably give a few hundred dollars a year to charity. It isn’t much. I’d like to give more. But that’s just not feasible right now.
If I’m going to save money for emergencies, build some small amount of wealth, have insurance and a place to live….it’s what I can afford.
Personally, I do believe in a society with a much more comprehensive safety net. I’d rather pay taxes so that all people’s basic needs were met than allow charities, which can cherry pick, to distribute help.
Because I DO NOT live in a society that thinks my family is important enough to assure us the ability to procure food, housing and medical care even if we run into trouble, then my hesitancy to give increases. How do I know I won’t need the money to provide my own safety net? We’re all on our own in this society, if you ask me, and it’s not surprising that people often act accordingly.
This especially applies to those who don’t embrace the Christian doctrine of tithing. I’d like to see a split between those who give to religious organizations, which aren’t exactly the same thing as charities, and those who give to other causes.
loading....
Very disappointed in GRS today.
-Long Time Reader
loading....
I believe natural law, evolution and natural selection all fit nicely together. The survival of the fittest. We like to say that we believe we should help other humans and also take care of our planet, but the more we take care of humans, the more humans there are on this planet, and the more we wreak havoc on our planet. What if the right thing to do is to care more for the planet and less for our fellow humans?
You’re assuming a zero-sum that doesn’t exist. Caring for our fellow humans includes all levels of caring. One of the things that gets proven out again and again is that if you help women, especially if you help poor women, with education, empowerment, and so on, they have a higher standard of living, more control over their own decisions and bodies, and have fewer (but better educated and nourished) children. The socialism you express a worry about leads to lower birth rates in the countries that practice it, because countries that take care of their populations feel less of a force for having as many children to care for their elders later. The lower the standard of living and available healthcare, the more children people have, both because they have fewer birth control options and because more children = more adult offspring to carry the load later.
Ergo, helping people via targeting charities that honestly improve quality of life works on the underlying issues that lead to the overpopulation you’re worried about.
loading....
I’m always surprised at discussions on the ‘efficiency’ of charities, because I think that standard measures of efficiency miss the point a little.
Large, direct service, ‘ambulance at the bottom of the cliff’-style charities consistently top those lists. The work (eg. distributing food at a food bank) requires little training, so they can rely heavily on volunteer support or ‘third party’ organizations, and also seek resources from foundations to cover their administrative expenses. There’s a lot of accounting finangling involved to ensure they’re keeping that coveted ’100% of public contributions go to our cause’ statistic.
On the other hand, charities that address ‘root causes’ of social issues – through things like job training programs, savings matching, etc – necessarily have higher expenses because they need skilled/trained workers in order to carry out their mission. That means more of their budget is devoted to hiring, training, travel and other things. And if you look at Charity Navigator’s list of ‘inefficient’ charities (i.e. those spending a lot on administrative costs), museums dominate the list. Too right! I hope museums are spending my donation on insurance for their artifacts, qualified curators and excellent educational programs – that’s what they SHOULD do.
I’m also surprised that on a blog that has the ethos that the average person can ‘get rich slowly’, it’s seen as a good thing that the CEO of a large charitable organization only earns 28,000 a year. Charity work is often mentally and emotionally demanding and there is a high rate of turnover – leading to more recruitment and training expenses. A salary that’s barely 200% of poverty for such demanding work serves as a barrier to entry for all but the independently wealthy (or those with income from other sources, such as a spouse).
Aren’t we about having financial health while doing what you love here? Shouldn’t it be possible to do good work in the nonprofit sector and also earn an above-poverty-level wage, without getting harshly judged as ‘inefficient’ by donors?
loading....
I personally believe that liberals contribute more to real, worthwhile charities than conservatives do. The statistics are skewed by “religious institutions” qualifying as a “charity.” I’d rather my money went to feeding the poor, rather than banning gay marriage; or healing the sick rather than recruiting cult members.
loading....
Sometimes I get uncomfortable with one aspect of charity, that some people (not all) have.
That aspect is the idea that by giving to the poor, you are superior to them. That you’re giving to them, and you will keep giving to them because, hopefully, they will stay poor, and indebted to you.
Now, that kind of thinking is old. It dates back to social classes, when servants stayed servants no matter what and nobles stayed nobles, and superior. It’s not as common nowadays, but still, I can sometimes feel it, and I just hate it.
As someone who has been in need too (and all of us here who have been in debt will know what I mean), I’ve always found it humiliating to take and have no way of thanking the person.
Imagine being in debt, except nobody expects you to pay it back. That’s just demeaning.
So, I like a website called Kiva, that’s a lending website. You lend money, rather than giving it. The person pays it back. In the end, they’re responsible for their own fortune, they worked for it, they don’t owe you anything.
And on top of that, any money they pay back, you can lend again.
And if you feel it’s not “real charity” (which is true, it’s not charity. It’s lending money. That’s the point, it’s helping without telling anyone you’re better than them), nothing prevents you to combine both.
I also personally prefer providing a service rather than money. I feel that too often, people (well, rich people) give some money without thinking about it, and tell themselves they’re good people, but wouldn’t spend 5 minutes actually helping someone.
If you’re volunteering, helping directly, 100% of your efforts go towards the cause. If you’re worried about how much of your money will be spent on actually helping, that’s a solution for you. Plus you get to see the people face to face, and they get to see you. It’s more personal.
loading....
Jason B said:
“I believe natural law, evolution and natural selection all fit nicely together. The survival of the fittest. We like to say that we believe we should help other humans and also take care of our planet, but the more we take care of humans, the more humans there are on this planet, and the more we wreak havoc on our planet. What if the right thing to do is to care more for the planet and less for our fellow humans?”
What prevents you from donating to a charity that, for instance, makes birth control available in developing countries? Or even in non-developing countries? That helps humans, and that doesn’t create more of us (quite the opposite, prevents unwanted people from being born).
It’s not like it’s an either/or choice. There are ways to help humans that don’t lead them to having more kids.
loading....
@StephanieRJ -
Since I was the one that introduced the $28,000 figure, I’m guessing that part of your comment’s directed at my comment.
I didn’t mean to imply that one should give to the Internation Children’s Fund (or any other nonprofit) for the sole reason that the CEO only makes $28,000. I don’t believe Charity Navigator would say that, either. I believe there are a number of factors that influence giving. And, honestly, for me, executive pay isn’t high on my list of things to pay attention to. Further, I didn’t mean to imply that nonprofit executives (or non-executive workers) shouldn’t receive adequate compensation.
What I was trying to do was to address the issue from the post that read “Expressing concern about what a charity is going to do with your money is a terrible excuse for not giving,” and to address the point in comment #11 (Jane) that said “sometimes when I go to look at the CEO’s salary, I am appalled.”
The sole points of my comment that used the $28,000 datapoint were
1) There are nonprofits that do not pay their executives unbelievably high salaries, and if you feel strongly that executive pay should be kept in check, there are nonprofits that might be a good match for you.
and
2) There is a resource (Charity Navigator) that wasn’t mentioned in the article, but that would serve people well as they consider which charities they want to give money to.
If I didn’t make those points clearer, I’m sorry. I believe that, ultimately, you and I are on the same page, that A) nonprofit workers shouldn’t get the shaft, just because they’ve decided to work for a nonprofit; B) people shouldn’t use easy excuses (“exorbitant executive pay”) as an “out” for donating to worthy causes.
I’d love to know if there was anything in that clarification that muddied the waters further. Thanks.
loading....
*sigh*
If your comment isn’t appearing, that’s because it’s in moderation. If it’s in moderation, ask yourself why that might be the case.
If you want to make your point in a different way — one that’s not intentionally provocative — please do so. Look at the other commenters for an example of what’s acceptable. Again, let’s keep the conversation smart. There are other places on the internet to call names and point fingers.
You’re in my living room here. Don’t be a jerk.
loading....
This isn’t “An Argument For a Secular Tithe” at all. It’s a recitation of some statistics, and a list of ways the author wants to relieve her guilt (but doesn’t). An argument in favor of a tithe would present reasoning as to *why* I should do such a thing. This article doesn’t. Personally, I don’t feel guilty about the way I live my life, and as such feel no obligation to fix it by throwing money at the problem.
loading....
J.D., you’re doing a good job of keeping the discussion thoughtful.
I’m overlooking the political tone (which didn’t work in my viewpoint) to see the very good point of the story which is to give — no excuses.
I didn’t give regularly until I created a budget with that line item. if I don’t give it all during the month it goes in a designated savings bucket which I give during the year.
loading....
“Expressing concern about what a charity is going to do with your money is a terrible excuse for not giving”
This statement is both wrong and irresponsible.
It is my opinion (opinion only, based on my first hand observations as a Peace Corps Volunteer) that with respect to international aid (because that is what I am familiar with) — this “aid” is executed in a way that HURTS more than it helps.
ABSOLUTELY do your homework before giving — and checking what percent of admin fees a charity has is not enough
One more small thing: I observed some Mission work overseas that was truly wonderful, but also several instances that were terrible (embarrassingly, a mission from my own faith came to my village and showed “The Passion” to small children) — committing time and good judgment to these activities can be just as if not more valuable than tithing!
loading....
Interesting article and a good reminder, in this “season of giving.” My wife and I have gotten away from physical and monetary gifts for Christmas and Winter Solstice, for the most part. Instead, we give a few hundred dollars to a couple of selected charities, in the names of our relatives…
loading....
I am a great proponent of giving locally — until I live in a Utopia, there will be plenty of needs nearby and when I help others in my community, I am also helping myself to live in a happier, healthier, environment.
But, of course, sometimes there will be situations (recently there were several deaths that occurred in my social circle, the parent of a friend, and the like) when a charity that I don’t usually contribute to is noted as the recipient. I always write a note with my check to the organization, explaining that I am giving a one-time-only gift and want all of my money to go to their charitable activities, not to additional mailings to me. I’ve noted that good charities will understand and act on that direction.
loading....
I have tithed on my gross income for over 35 years and it has never done me any harm and probably has done many people a lot of good. I don’t like to see pressure put on people to give, especially at work where one cannot easily refuse.
loading....