Wednesday, December 12, 2007
The Colorado Nonprofit Association just released their report on individual charitable giving. Because of previous research, I was ready to make fun of hypocritical Boulder, but it's really not that bad. Boulder's rate (3.8% of income) is better than the national average (3.6%) and a lot better than Denver. The winners are Colorado Springs (4.2%) and the zip codes inside the Air Force Academy (5.7%).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
All this is nice and dandy but misses a lot of the story. It cannot get data from people like me who don't itemize. There's no breakdown of where the money is going as money for CU's new biotech building is the same as church contributions is the same as soup kitchen stuff. Also I'd be more interested in % of disposable income being donated not raw income. So while interesting this is not something I would draw too many conclusions from about people anywhere being more sympathetic to the plight of others.
hmmm... why might CO Springs and the Air Force Academy give more?
Furthermore, I think it would also be telling not only to look at the percentage of giving to income, but also adjusting for income itself. So looking at the median income and median housing price (a sign of overall wealth) and then compare the giving rates.
What this might show is that Boulder is above average wealthy, and in that respect the giving of the below average wealthy (Air Force Academy) is even more meaningful.
Not that the wealthy should give more or anything...but that they have a bit more ability to do so...
Does Air Force really have a lower median income. I'd guess those numbers are mostly professors who might have subsidized on base housing. Is that accounted for in the stats. I agree though that those with more disposable income it would seem would give more away though some do at death like Warren Buffet. Stats like these are misleading especially when not accounting for such a large portion of the population that doesn't itemize. I probably could have done this survey with different critiria so Boulder looked great or awful not just average.
I'll say two things.
1. Only itemized deductions. This is the real weak point in the study, and may make a real difference. To make that case, though, you have to be able to say how this will systematically bias results in one way or the other. Can you find survey data about giving from people who don't itemize?
2. Where the money goes. Which charities are most effective is an enormously complex issue, but for the purposes here I don't care. Whether you're giving to the Humane Society, NPR, or the Mushroom Preservation Fund, you're giving money away instead of buying a plasma TV. And that's interesting and important by itself.
Post a Comment