Do we have a moral obligation to give back to society when we become a certain age?
Not that age should ever play a role in deciding when we give. I am a true believe of teaching my children to donate their toys early. Sadly, our home state ranks a low 30+ out of 50. And it appears that religion (Utah is ranked nr. 1) and politics (red vs blue states) play a major role in giving. Take a look – you might be surprised by the results.
According to a the Chronicle of Philanthropy, we could also do a lot more as citizens of the free world.
The out of sight, out of mind theory holds more weight according to their research. Here’s an excerpt:
Plenty of people, including philanthropy evangelists like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, think the rich could do much more. But that isn’t likely to happen when rich people are living in enclaves with one another.
The Chronicle’s study found that when wealthy people are heavily clustered in a neighborhood—meaning that when households making more than $200,000 a year account for more than 40 percent of the taxpayers—the affluent households give an average of only 2.8 percent of discretionary income to charity.
That’s lower than the overall giving rate in all but four of the nation’s 366 metropolitan areas.
I then reflected back to how women, via church and schools, were the glue that held communities together. They were activists in their own right. Think of the hollywood versions of Aunt B. on the Andy Griffith show or Leave it to Beaver’s mom, or Mrs. Brady, personifying what women did back in the day. They surely had more time to give.
No matter how time-starved we are (which I’m hoping will change some day) I believe it’s our moral obligation to find ways to give back. Volunteering your time, items or money all count towards giving. Many of us already give household items or hand-me-downs to Good Will or churches. Is that enough? How can we contribute more?
Comments are closed.