stuckincincy Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 The Catalogue for Philanthropy's 2004 Generosity Index. http://www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cf...y.php?year=2004 CT ranks first in making money, but joins MA, RI and NH at the bottom of this annual index of charatible giving. The data, obtained from 2002 Federal Tax Returns (the most recent available) compares average annual adjusted income("Having Rank") vs. itemized charitible deductions (Giving Rank) for each State. For example, Mississippi has the lowest average income rank yet has the 5th highest rank for giving, resulting in being the most generous state even though it's the poorest. The 1st "Blue State (NY) comes in at #26.
Bill from NYC Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 The Catalogue for Philanthropy's 2004 Generosity Index. http://www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cf...y.php?year=2004 CT ranks first in making money, but joins MA, RI and NH at the bottom of this annual index of charatible giving. The data, obtained from 2002 Federal Tax Returns (the most recent available) compares average annual adjusted income("Having Rank") vs. itemized charitible deductions (Giving Rank) for each State. For example, Mississippi has the lowest average income rank yet has the 5th highest rank for giving, resulting in being the most generous state even though it's the poorest. The 1st "Blue State (NY) comes in at #26. 111206[/snapback] Can you only imagine the causes they DID contribute to?
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Can you only imagine the causes they DID contribute to? 111222[/snapback] A gerbil in every intestinal tract.
Bill from NYC Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 A gerbil in every intestinal tract. 111235[/snapback] So you have been to St. Vincent's Hospital? Years ago, guys were constantly coming in with "trapped" gerbils. Then, they would blame AIDS on Reagan and Bush.
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 So you have been to St. Vincent's Hospital? Years ago, guys were constantly coming in with "trapped" gerbils. Then, they would blame AIDS on Reagan and Bush. 111255[/snapback] No. I lived in the Bay Area for 5 years. One of the morning shows (either KSJO or KOME) would regularly send someone around to the local emergency rooms to interview the staff on the things they removed from people's asses. Lightbulbs and bananas were common, but the best one ever was 72 jeweler's saws. I don't know what a jeweler's saw is, but storing 72 ANYTHING with teeth up your butt is a recipe for disasster.
/dev/null Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 why should they contribute their own money when they can spend other people's money
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 why should they contribute their own money when they can spend other people's money 111356[/snapback] It's actually just further proof that excessive taxation leads to social apathy. When people give so much money to government, they expect them to take care of EVERYTHING. It becomes someone else's problem. Plus, they're busy shoving things up their ass.
stuckincincy Posted November 10, 2004 Author Posted November 10, 2004 No. I lived in the Bay Area for 5 years. One of the morning shows (either KSJO or KOME) would regularly send someone around to the local emergency rooms to interview the staff on the things they removed from people's asses. Lightbulbs and bananas were common, but the best one ever was 72 jeweler's saws. I don't know what a jeweler's saw is, but storing 72 ANYTHING with teeth up your butt is a recipe for disasster. 111268[/snapback] I worked with the University of Cincinnati for a couple of years, several years ago (hazardous soils research). For some reason, the subject of "gerbiling" came up, and my boss told me that they no longer went to University Hospital to get them removed (for free, naturally), because they began calling the cops who charged them with animal cruelty.
Mickey Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Well, it could be that they have no money left after paying all those taxes that then get spent in the red states. Most blue states are tax creditors, they get back way less in federal pork than they contribute in tax revenues. The red states are the biggest tax debtors in that they get back way more pork than they contribute in tax revenues. Sucking so lavishly on the federal teat leaves them plenty of milk and honey to give away.
SilverNRed Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Lightbulbs and bananas were common, but the best one ever was 72 jeweler's saws. I don't know what a jeweler's saw is, but storing 72 ANYTHING with teeth up your butt is a recipe for disasster. 111268[/snapback] Words to live by, AD.
stuckincincy Posted November 10, 2004 Author Posted November 10, 2004 Well, it could be that they have no money left after paying all those taxes that then get spent in the red states. Most blue states are tax creditors, they get back way less in federal pork than they contribute in tax revenues. The red states are the biggest tax debtors in that they get back way more pork than they contribute in tax revenues. Sucking so lavishly on the federal teat leaves them plenty of milk and honey to give away. 111871[/snapback] Sounds like rationale for stopping the Federal government's intrusion...
Alaska Darin Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 Sounds like rationale for stopping the Federal government's intrusion... 111952[/snapback] Nah, more of it will change the paradigm...
boomerjamhead Posted November 10, 2004 Posted November 10, 2004 This is a preposterous study. Everyone knows that you only give to a charity or get involved in a cause after you or someone close to you is adversely affected by a tragedy of some sort. Sheesh… I guess we'll never learn.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 It is called "Yankee frugality." Damn tight wads. Then again other places are swayed to give money by the evangelists... I don't think that plays too well in the NE. Whole different story in the "cold" north. Let me see, give a little more to the church and go cold this winter or maybe less and stay warm. No such problem in the "warmer" south. ???
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Sounds like rationale for stopping the Federal government's intrusion... 111952[/snapback] Ya... After years of subsidizing the mostly red and rural parts of the country... Now that the infrastructure has been laid on the backs of the industrialized north they want to say see ya. Just imagine if it wasn't for all the New Deal projects that brought in reasonable costs to electrifying rural America. Just like everything else, now when it is time to start contributing, they want to bail. There is no way in hell things would have been cost effective to bring services into the remote parts of the country. Argue all you want Darin... Those are the facts.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Well, it could be that they have no money left after paying all those taxes that then get spent in the red states. Most blue states are tax creditors, they get back way less in federal pork than they contribute in tax revenues. The red states are the biggest tax debtors in that they get back way more pork than they contribute in tax revenues. Sucking so lavishly on the federal teat leaves them plenty of milk and honey to give away. 111871[/snapback] Exactly... Just as in corporate welfare... As soon as the tax benefits run out and it is time to start paying... They bail to somewhere else... Defect, defect, defect... Just human nature... You will always get the sorry slep at the bar you waits last to buy a round, knowing all too well that he will never really pay for it.
Typical TBD Guy Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 This further validates the argument that help for the underprivileged could be best accomplished via private charitable means, as opposed to the typical liberal solution of having government solve all of life's problems.
Alaska Darin Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Ya... After years of subsidizing the mostly red and rural parts of the country... Now that the infrastructure has been laid on the backs of the industrialized north they want to say see ya. Just imagine if it wasn't for all the New Deal projects that brought in reasonable costs to electrifying rural America. Just like everything else, now when it is time to start contributing, they want to bail. There is no way in hell things would have been cost effective to bring services into the remote parts of the country. Argue all you want Darin... Those are the facts. 112493[/snapback] Infrastructure is Constitutional. Why bother having a union of states? Not once have I complained about that. What's funny is hearing the Liberals complain because their tax money is going to help the less fortunate, who refuse to vote for more government because they see the overwhelming problems facing the Blue States because of same.
Dwight Drane Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 Lightbulbs and bananas were common, but the best one ever was 72 jeweler's saws. I don't know what a jeweler's saw is, but storing 72 ANYTHING with teeth up your butt is a recipe for disasster. 111268[/snapback] It sounds like a play the Goaline Offense would call when Sam Adams is in. Drew: "Alright....72 Jeweler's Saws on 1..ready?..Break!" 72 Jeweler's Saws
DC Tom Posted November 11, 2004 Posted November 11, 2004 No. I lived in the Bay Area for 5 years. One of the morning shows (either KSJO or KOME) would regularly send someone around to the local emergency rooms to interview the staff on the things they removed from people's asses. Lightbulbs and bananas were common, but the best one ever was 72 jeweler's saws. I don't know what a jeweler's saw is, but storing 72 ANYTHING with teeth up your butt is a recipe for disasster. 111268[/snapback] Typical jeweler's saw They're small...for a saw. But even one is pretty damned big for an enema.
Recommended Posts