Rrog
Well-Known Member
Yeah, @MuyLocoNC is one of the more consistently ignorant amongst the ignorant
Donations pour in from liberals to help Obamacare-hating conservative
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
desert dude
Well-Known Member
"
People who live in deeply religious regions of the country — the solid-red states of the Bible Belt and Utah — give more of their income to charity than those who don’t. Of the top 10 most generous states, according to a Chronicle of Philanthropy study based on itemized charitable contributions among people who made at least $50,000, nine voted for Mitt Romney in 2012. "
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/home-front/357562/which-political-party-more-charitable-nancy-french
People who live in deeply religious regions of the country — the solid-red states of the Bible Belt and Utah — give more of their income to charity than those who don’t. Of the top 10 most generous states, according to a Chronicle of Philanthropy study based on itemized charitable contributions among people who made at least $50,000, nine voted for Mitt Romney in 2012. "
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/home-front/357562/which-political-party-more-charitable-nancy-french
desert dude
Well-Known Member
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=5791846
Smilin' Joe Biden gave average of $369 to charity a year
Smilin' Joe Biden gave average of $369 to charity a year
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Stephanapolis (or however you spell his name) is a giver!
http://news.yahoo.com/stephanopoulos-says-disclosed-donations-164022662.html
ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos will not moderate a Republican presidential debate next winter, part of the fallout from reports that the network's top political anchor contributed $75,000 over a three-year period to the Clinton Foundation.
http://news.yahoo.com/stephanopoulos-says-disclosed-donations-164022662.html
ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos will not moderate a Republican presidential debate next winter, part of the fallout from reports that the network's top political anchor contributed $75,000 over a three-year period to the Clinton Foundation.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
The Koch brothers:
In his lifetime, he and the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation have pledged or contributed more than $1.2 billion to cancer research, medical centers, educational institutions, arts and cultural institutions, and to assist public policy organizations.
"The man on the right is a fucking saint", said mother Teresa.
In his lifetime, he and the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation have pledged or contributed more than $1.2 billion to cancer research, medical centers, educational institutions, arts and cultural institutions, and to assist public policy organizations.
"The man on the right is a fucking saint", said mother Teresa.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
yeah, but those red states are massive welfare hogs living off the teat of the blue states.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Check out the groundbreaking discovery by DD.. Religious people give more money to churches than non religious people!
HOLY SHIT! Who would have guessed that?!
Meanwhile: http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/files/research/giving_focused_on_meeting_needs_of_the_poor_july_2007.pdf
"The degree of religious contribution is important, because a 2007 study by Indiana University found that only 10% to 25% of church donations end up being spent on social welfare purposes, of which assistance to the poor is only a subset. In other words, if you think of "giving" as "giving to the poor," a lot of the money donated by conservatives may be missing the target.
An extreme case may have been that of Mitt Romney, whose tax disclosures during his 2012 presidential campaign indicated that he gave a higher percentage of his income away than his Democratic opponent, President Obama, 29.4% to 21.8%. Of course he was richer, so he gave away a lot more dollars. But fully 80% of Romney's donations went to the Mormon church; and a large further chunk went to a family foundation that also funneled much of it to the church.
The Obamas' contribution mostly went to humanitarian organizations like the Red Cross and the United Negro College Fund."
"Where do liberals and conservatives give their money?
While levels of giving are roughly equivalent, liberals are much more likely to do- nate to secular organizations, and conservatives are more likely to donate to religious causes, especially their own congregation."
http://themonkeycage.org/2012/10/18/who-really-gives-partisanship-and-charitable-giving-in-the-united-states/
Conservatives give money to their churches, liberals give their money to actually help the poor
But the point of the OP was to ask the simple question. If that man was a liberal with no money and no health insurance, how do you think conservatives would have reacted to him starting up a gofundme page and asking for donations to pay for his medical bills?
If you think conservatives would have come running to the rescue, you're out of your mind. Any time a liberal needs anything the republican go to is "get it yourself/you should have saved your money/you made the wrong choices in life/you're lazy/you have no valuable skills/you get paid what you're worth/blah blah blah bullshit".
See any of my threads about minimum wage or income inequality for multiple shining examples of liberal compassion when a fellow citizen is in legitimate need (even if it's a conservative) and vitriolic hatred towards the left from every conservative asshat member that comments
Liberals are simply better people with more understanding of reality, politics, economics and history than conservatives are
HOLY SHIT! Who would have guessed that?!
Meanwhile: http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/files/research/giving_focused_on_meeting_needs_of_the_poor_july_2007.pdf
"The degree of religious contribution is important, because a 2007 study by Indiana University found that only 10% to 25% of church donations end up being spent on social welfare purposes, of which assistance to the poor is only a subset. In other words, if you think of "giving" as "giving to the poor," a lot of the money donated by conservatives may be missing the target.
An extreme case may have been that of Mitt Romney, whose tax disclosures during his 2012 presidential campaign indicated that he gave a higher percentage of his income away than his Democratic opponent, President Obama, 29.4% to 21.8%. Of course he was richer, so he gave away a lot more dollars. But fully 80% of Romney's donations went to the Mormon church; and a large further chunk went to a family foundation that also funneled much of it to the church.
The Obamas' contribution mostly went to humanitarian organizations like the Red Cross and the United Negro College Fund."
"Where do liberals and conservatives give their money?
While levels of giving are roughly equivalent, liberals are much more likely to do- nate to secular organizations, and conservatives are more likely to donate to religious causes, especially their own congregation."
http://themonkeycage.org/2012/10/18/who-really-gives-partisanship-and-charitable-giving-in-the-united-states/
Conservatives give money to their churches, liberals give their money to actually help the poor
But the point of the OP was to ask the simple question. If that man was a liberal with no money and no health insurance, how do you think conservatives would have reacted to him starting up a gofundme page and asking for donations to pay for his medical bills?
If you think conservatives would have come running to the rescue, you're out of your mind. Any time a liberal needs anything the republican go to is "get it yourself/you should have saved your money/you made the wrong choices in life/you're lazy/you have no valuable skills/you get paid what you're worth/blah blah blah bullshit".
See any of my threads about minimum wage or income inequality for multiple shining examples of liberal compassion when a fellow citizen is in legitimate need (even if it's a conservative) and vitriolic hatred towards the left from every conservative asshat member that comments
Liberals are simply better people with more understanding of reality, politics, economics and history than conservatives are
panhead
Well-Known Member
I dont know what to make of this story , i strongly feel that the people who felt the need to talk shit after they donated are complete fuck sticks .
An act of charity shouldnt be political or come with strings attached , giving a sick person $5 bucks dont mean you should try n humiliate them , or use your donation as a reason to spew politicial agendas .
We help people & animals because it makes us feel good about helping , i cant imagine myself taking advantage of another mans illness to talk shit about their political beliefs , charity should cross all boundries , even racism & politics .
Anybody here donating any money to help him get surgery ? I'll match $50 with another riu member, any other members want to do something good ?
An act of charity shouldnt be political or come with strings attached , giving a sick person $5 bucks dont mean you should try n humiliate them , or use your donation as a reason to spew politicial agendas .
We help people & animals because it makes us feel good about helping , i cant imagine myself taking advantage of another mans illness to talk shit about their political beliefs , charity should cross all boundries , even racism & politics .
Anybody here donating any money to help him get surgery ? I'll match $50 with another riu member, any other members want to do something good ?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I think you're right about some of the comments, but I would make a political point if I donated, just like I would hope anyone would if I were him or in his position. I wouldn't be a dick, but I'd make sure I tell the guy why I'm donating to him and how my opinions are helping him get the medical treatment he needs so that maybe he'll reconsider his own opinions that might help somebody else later
panhead
Well-Known Member
See stuff like that isnt out of line but the guys calling him stupid & shit like that are more self serving than charitable.
Im fairly sure at this point he's rethinking his stance on insurance , i wouldnt say it directly to him but it is very stupid for a smoker with diabetes to avoid having an insurance plan , my wife has MS & has used over $400,000 worth of the $750,000 lifetime single disease pay out her plan covers , once its used up i'll put her back on my retiree insurance for $350 a month to pick up the expenses .
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
And yet Universal Healthcare costs the taxpayer up to 4x less than the Obamacare system.
Wise up America, health should not be for profit. (Well, you can have private clinics that 100% paid for privately for the rich people, they'll still be contributing through taxes to the public system but just not using it)
I'm surprised righties haven't copped on to the fact it's a simple numbers game, 4x cheaper.
MuyLocoNC
Well-Known Member
Oh, my bad. Please show me ANY evidence beyond the four "samples" that supports the laughable contention that the donations came "mostly from self-professed progressives" or "Donations pour in from liberals".
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I have yet to see you condemn supply side economics
MuyLocoNC
Well-Known Member
Why the fuck would any sane individual do so? The only time there's a problem with it, is when spending isn't reduced. Cut taxes, slash the budget in half...VIOLÁ!
Keynesians, lol.
bearkat42
Well-Known Member
That's because idiots in those states tithe. Picture me giving away my hard earned scratch to the good reverend.
Sent from my SM-T230NU using Rollitup mobile app
one self proclaimed progressive gave money= majority. Liberal logic.
51%? majority.
56%? Supermajority.
More liberal logic.
assclownshoes indeed.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Supply side economics transfers the wealth from the middle/lower class to the upper class
If you're against "the transfer of wealth" as you so claim, you would be against supply side economics
I mean, if you were intellectually honest..