3 ms·

One thing that's never mentioned in these types of articles is that the top two categories for donations are churches and schools. Fully one third of US donatio

One thing that's never mentioned in these types of articles is that the top two categories for donations are churches and schools. Fully one third of US donations are to churches and another 13% for educational institutions (including private colleges and K-12 schools). That's nearly half of donations going to organizations that perform very little actual philanthropy and spend most of their money with organizational self-interest in mind.

dcaldwell 16y ago
I would argue that even if one didn't see the value in religious organizations, schools do provide a benefit or actual philanthropy. Most of those who pay for private school both pay taxes to help cover the overall costs of public education and also pay tuition (and make donations) to their privates schools. In essence, the private education is providing quality education without removing resources from public schools. From the standpoint of churches, I agree that many of them perform little outreach to their communities. However, many of them do provide valuable philanthropic services such as soup kitchens, clothes closets, donated space for AA meetings, etc.
Groxx 16y ago
Doesn't that make the donation philanthropic, with the express goal of the receiver using it to further their self-interest? That's still philanthropy. Heck, what donation-receiver doesn't do this? Middle-men like the Red Cross count for both giver and receiver, so they're partially exempt - they give money / services they receive to those who intend to use it to further their best interest.
- rbranson 16y ago
  The people who donate to the Red Cross are very unlikely to receive back in any tangible form. The average American church is more like a club which collects money from it's members to maintain the clubhouse and provide weekly entertainment. The more hip, "relevant" churches require even more money because they have more contemporary furnishings and design, agency-style marketing campaigns, sophisticated audio/video equipment, larger spaces for ancillary services such as child care and small group meetings, bring in out-of-town acts, and keep a large staff to support these operations. This is especially effective because it positions the church as more of a brand and lifestyle provider rather than just a "thing that we do on Sundays." People who spend 5-10 hours a week involved in church activities become psychologically dependent and are going to be astronomically more likely to donate, and donate in larger amounts. This is clearly in the best interest of the church as it increases donations, and I have no problem with them undertaking these activities, but I think they operate far outside of the original spirit of what tax-exempt status was purposed for. As a side note, and a little anecdote, my girlfriend works at a liquor store and has several regular customers that use their tax-exempt status as church staff to purchase wine and liquor that is clearly for themselves. Of course, there's almost no way to create an efficient audit trail for this type of stuff, so they get away with it.
CarlSmotricz 16y ago
I agree that this feel-good article about the USA's astounding generosity should be taken with a grain of salt: http://yashwata.info/2010/07/15/charity1/ http://yashwata.info/2010/07/15/charity1/
endtime 16y ago
Agreed about the churches, but if by schools you're referring primarily to universities, well...don't those donations help fund financial aid for people who otherwise wouldn't be able to attend? BTW, are you the R. Branson? You never know on HN...

dcaldwell 16y ago

I would argue that even if one didn't see the value in religious organizations, schools do provide a benefit or actual philanthropy. Most of those who pay for private school both pay taxes to help cover the overall costs of public education and also pay tuition (and make donations) to their privates schools. In essence, the private education is providing quality education without removing resources from public schools. From the standpoint of churches, I agree that many of them perform little outreach to their communities. However, many of them do provide valuable philanthropic services such as soup kitchens, clothes closets, donated space for AA meetings, etc.

Groxx 16y ago

Doesn't that make the donation philanthropic, with the express goal of the receiver using it to further their self-interest? That's still philanthropy. Heck, what donation-receiver doesn't do this? Middle-men like the Red Cross count for both giver and receiver, so they're partially exempt - they give money / services they receive to those who intend to use it to further their best interest.

rbranson 16y ago
The people who donate to the Red Cross are very unlikely to receive back in any tangible form. The average American church is more like a club which collects money from it's members to maintain the clubhouse and provide weekly entertainment. The more hip, "relevant" churches require even more money because they have more contemporary furnishings and design, agency-style marketing campaigns, sophisticated audio/video equipment, larger spaces for ancillary services such as child care and small group meetings, bring in out-of-town acts, and keep a large staff to support these operations. This is especially effective because it positions the church as more of a brand and lifestyle provider rather than just a "thing that we do on Sundays." People who spend 5-10 hours a week involved in church activities become psychologically dependent and are going to be astronomically more likely to donate, and donate in larger amounts. This is clearly in the best interest of the church as it increases donations, and I have no problem with them undertaking these activities, but I think they operate far outside of the original spirit of what tax-exempt status was purposed for. As a side note, and a little anecdote, my girlfriend works at a liquor store and has several regular customers that use their tax-exempt status as church staff to purchase wine and liquor that is clearly for themselves. Of course, there's almost no way to create an efficient audit trail for this type of stuff, so they get away with it.

CarlSmotricz 16y ago

I agree that this feel-good article about the USA's astounding generosity should be taken with a grain of salt: http://yashwata.info/2010/07/15/charity1/ http://yashwata.info/2010/07/15/charity1/

endtime 16y ago

Agreed about the churches, but if by schools you're referring primarily to universities, well...don't those donations help fund financial aid for people who otherwise wouldn't be able to attend? BTW, are you the R. Branson? You never know on HN...