Giving to the Poor

[sinner/SAVED]

This is true of GOVERNMENT giving, but not of INDIVIDUAL giving.

The US ranks 22nd in the world when you consider only government spending as a percentage of GNP. When you factor in private contributions we only move up to 7th in the world. Not very giving for the wealthiest nation in history if you want my opinion.

Click here for the statistics.

 

[porcupine]

The US ranks 22nd in the world when you consider only government spending as a percentage of GNP. When you factor in private contributions we only move up to 7th in the world. Not very giving for the wealthiest nation in history if you want my opinion.

Click here for the statistics.

What I mean is to look at individual contributions alone -- not mixed with government. Government "giving" is not compassion or charity, it is force.

 

[Celticflower]

******going to go pick up my crochet hook and work on the blanket that I am making for charity with money I squeezed out of my tight monthly budget*****

 

[die2live]

It is true that a lot of the money that goes toward world relief comes from people in the US individually giving. But compare that to the amount they spend on pet food.
It has been estimated that it would take about 13 billion dollars a year to end world hunger. In the US alone, more than that is spent on pet food. Since world hunger is still an issue, I'm guessing that we're not giving nearly that much. Not that I'm saying having pets is wrong. However, most of the people I know spend a lot more on luxuries for themselves than on their pets. If we were to continue feeding our animals while redirecting those luxuries to the dire needs of others, we could make a difference.

 

[porcupine]

It is true that a lot of the money that goes toward world relief comes from people in the US individually giving. But compare that to the amount they spend on pet food.
It has been estimated that it would take about 13 billion dollars a year to end world hunger. In the US alone, more than that is spent on pet food. Since world hunger is still an issue, I'm guessing that we're not giving nearly that much. Not that I'm saying having pets is wrong. However, most of the people I know spend a lot more on luxuries for themselves than on their pets. If we were to continue feeding our animals while redirecting those luxuries to the dire needs of others, we could make a difference.

1. We don't know if the same INDIVIDUALS are spending more on pet food than their charitable giving. (Of course, most INDIVIDUAL charitable giving is "off the books" -- that is, people give to friends, relatives, and strangers who are in need, but not through any organization or group that would report figures.)

2. I can find lots of frivolous things people spend money on (based upon my opinion of "frivolous"), but that doesn't negate the giving done -- even if both the frivolous spending and the giving are done by the same people. (In my experience, people who are obsessed with expensive pets, hobbies, etc. are verly unlilely to be generous givers. Their treasure is mostly in the wrong places. The most likely givers on an individual level are often those that might do with some receiving themselves.)

3. It depends on what you describe as a "pet."

 

[die2live]

I am not arguing against what we are already giving. What we are giving is great, and it is making a difference. Just not a big enough difference. We need to give more, in addition to what we are already giving, not in place of it.

 

[trident343]

I think generosity is a gift of the spirit. Its more natural to take advantage of the weak than to help them.

 

[God Child]

Goodness is the fruit of the spirit i would associate charity with...one must be willing to give up their posessions, not being attatched to the things of this world. It is hard to separate from the world, but it needs to be done...