Generosity Index 2004

[Dartful Dodger]

This list takes all 50 states averages their annual income, and averages the amount of money they have donated that year.  So it isn't the amount each state donates, but the percentage of their income they are willing to give to charity.
 
Generosity Index 2004

This is not a chart designed by an out of work guy from Denmark, this is a REAL chart, based on what every tax payer put down on their tax returns.  Unlike IQ tests, which only shows the stats of the people that actually take the IQ test, this shows EVERYONE in that state.

An I.Q. if you believe the test results are accurate, are something you are born with.  Generosity is something you choose.

What traits are more important are up to you, but how people treat those less fortunate is high on my list.

[locash]

This is not based on what every tax payer put on their returns, but "is the aggregate data from the Internal Revenue Service on taxpayers who itemize and take a charitable deduction for their contributions." and "covers less than 30 percent of all US taxpayers, as over 70 percent take a standard deduction and do not itemize."

[Raleigh]

Also the way they are determining the rankings is very flawed.  They take your ranking on earnings minus ranking on giving.  So if your state has the highest income 1, and also had the highest giving 1, your net rank relation would be zero.  If you did it based on percentage of income given to charity (total givings divided by total income) West Virginia would be dead last, not 13th amoung many other changes to the rankings.

[Dartful Dodger]

Also the way they are determining the rankings is very flawed.  They take your ranking on earnings minus ranking on giving.  So if your state has the highest income 1, and also had the highest giving 1, your net rank relation would be zero.  If you did it based on percentage of income given to charity (total givings divided by total income) West Virginia would be dead last, not 13th amound other changes to the rankings.

Since I believe that how you treat others is more important than how smart others think you are, here's a link with the list without any pesky math.  This list shows what states gave more, but not what the states make.

Giving Rank

It's sad that the state with the lowest income is the 5th highest state to give to charity.

[locash]

Yes, charity is a good thing.  I am pretty sure we can agree on that.  However,  this ranking is meaningless (or at least as meaningless as the IQ ranking).  The argument you made against the IQ ranking in your initial post was:

 

Unlike IQ tests, which only shows the stats of the people that actually take the IQ test...

This "Giving Rank" suffers the same flaw; i.e. a limited sample of the population.  As I noted in my earlier response, this ranking is based only on the returns of people who itemize deductions, not everyone in the state as you surmised.  

[Raleigh]

It's sad that the state with the lowest income is the 5th highest state to give to charity.

Have you actually opened up the excel file that the information is coming from.  If you look at purely on giving with no other factors included,  Mississippi is 35th in giving, not 5th in total charitable givings.

[DrewKaree]

interesting.  The I.Q. one is accepted without question, but the giving one is studied, investigated, and sought to be debunked.

Why not just say we're so dumb for giving.

Or you're so smart for not giving.

Maybe there's truth in both, maybe there's crap in both.



Tell me, when will you guys investigate the "exit polls" to see the questions asked and if there seems to be any "skewing" of the questions asked.  

I'll be holding my breath - see, my cheeks are turning red  


I'm taking my moral majority and going home.  

[DrewKaree]

Oh, and Dartful, you really should (in keeping with the style of the thread names) change the title of this thread to

Generosity vs. Election Results - 2004

That way, it'll line up with the "I.Q." thread.  

I'm surprised I thought of this, with my low I.Q.   and I'm surprised you could spell jenerosite with yer low I.Q.  

Thankfully, we gave to "Hookt on Fonix"

[Crazy Cooter]

I'm glad to see that this one has some mathemagics behind it.  IMO, all graphs should have their source numbers right there like this one does.

A few things I'd like to note:
1- If you make less than $75,000, you're not included.
2- If you donate less than $xx, (varies by state) you don't need to itemize your charitable deductions.  So you're not included either.
3- There is no need to go through all this "Having rank", "Giving rank", etc.  This should be as simple as Miles per Gallon.  Take the miles, divide by gallons.  In this case, if you want to know donated dollar per income dollar, just divide it out.  It moves things around a bit.


As a sidenote, I've been doing some research on charitable organizations themselves (shut up, you're dorky too. Look at the site we're at  ).  I am shocked at how many are a straight up con.  Take "A Childs Wish" for example.  Sounds legit, but check it out:http://www.give.org/reports/care2_dyn.asp?125  There's a whole pile of them at:http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp

[paigeoliver]

This chart makes PERFECT sense. You have all the bible belt and heavily religous states at the top, because a good number of people in those states tithe 10 percent of their income to the church. While you have the "liberal" states down at the bottom.

I'll bet if you compared this chart to another one showing percentage of church attendance you would find a VERY similar ordering to the states.

Lots of people give bits and pieces to charities, but few other than the church tithers donate 10 percent of their income.

You could also similarly argue it as the republican states give more, but general the churchgoing states and the republican states are the same ones.

[shmokes]

Democrats give to charity.  We just call it welfare.  

[paigeoliver]

Democrats give to charity.  We just call it welfare.  

No, you have it mixed up, Democrats RECEIVE welfare!    

Yes, I meant that as a joke, but I am sure somewhere there is a survey of how welfare recipients voted, and i'll bet that survey is 89 percent democratic, 10 percent republicans (all voting the morals angle, not the money one), and one percent independent\hippy,

[maraxle]

I was born and raised in NH (Live free or die, baby), and I can see how it would make sense that NH would be near the bottom of the giving rank.  After you're done paying the property taxes and the heating bills, there's not much left.  What is left gets saved.  In my experience, people there are pretty fiscally conservative.

[danny_galaga]

This list takes all 50 states averages their annual income, and averages the amount of money they have donated that year.  So it isn't the amount each state donates, but the percentage of their income they are willing to give to charity.
 
Generosity Index 2004

This is not a chart designed by an out of work guy from Denmark, this is a REAL chart, based on what every tax payer put down on their tax returns.  Unlike IQ tests, which only shows the stats of the people that actually take the IQ test, this shows EVERYONE in that state.

An I.Q. if you believe the test results are accurate, are something you are born with.  Generosity is something you choose.

What traits are more important are up to you, but how people treat those less fortunate is high on my list.

just as an aside to this, an IQ test doesn't tell you that much. and you can improve your IQ performance with practice. so it isn't measuring something you are born with...

[DrewKaree]

danny, I don't need an I.Q. test to see that your av is a real snicky!  whodat is?

[DrewKaree]

nevermind, found and answered my own question.

YOWZA  

I may start watching that show now!

[patrickl]

Or get the Playboy edition with her in it.

[Dartful Dodger]

Oh, and Dartful, you really should (in keeping with the style of the thread names) change the title of this thread to

Generosity vs. Election Results - 2004

This chart has no reds or purples to make up for the lack of blues. I could not make a connection to this website and any political party.

The text for the title I used was copied and pasted off of the website.

I'm surprised you could spell jenerosite with yer low I.Q.  

The text for the title I used was copied and pasted off of the website.

The text for the text above was copied and pasted from the text above the text above.
 

[DrewKaree]

This chart has no reds or purples to make up for the lack of blues.

YOU sir, are king of the understated humor.

I present the following as proof:

I'm surprised you could spell jenerosite with yer low I.Q.  

The text for the title I used was copied and pasted off of the website.

The text for the text above was copied and pasted from the text above the text above.