Charitable Giving: What's a fair percentage of your income?

Just a general thought on savings...

Most people, whether they make 30k, 50k, or 100k a year, will live up to their last nickel. It's quite amazing how that just sort of happens. Get a better job? Go get a better house, better car, spend more, etc. What if instead of going for that better house or some other "next greatest thing" you remain at your current lifestyle. So, instead of living like a couple that makes $200k a year you live like a couple that makes $190k a year or $180k a year. Why pay the maximum mortgage you can afford? This is your largest expense of the month. Why not choose something a little more affordable and put back the savings.

This is what you do: Take 10% of what you make each pay check and put it away. Under a rock, a bed, in a bank...dig a big hole in your back yard if you have to.

Alan

Actually, Obama is gradually distancing himself from preaching a tax increase, because his handlers have advised him as I am advising you. Curious. Nonetheless, you are correct that there are many, many factors that impact an economy, of which is fiscal policy is but one part. And that is how you've made my point precisely for me, which is why it is utterly disingenuous to attribute Clinton's economic "success" to his fiscal policy. Causation and correlation are not one and the same. And what you have negligently omitted in this entire debate, is that tax rates under Clinton were lower, on average, than they were even under Reagan as the supply-side experiment moved along. It's not merely Obama's capital tax policy that I am worried about. But, I must be speaking as an underinformed partisan with no background in economics and finance, like 99.8% of the people on here.

I've been warning about the impending systemic credit crash for the better part of a year on here. We are in a startlingly different era than we were a short two decades ago. The US is no longer the bastion of global capital flight and investment, nor is it the nimble, productivity-enhancing, economic juggernaut with auspicious, secular growth tailwinds that it once was. And we are no longer in a secular disinflationary environment, though we may be in a temporarily deflationary one. I hope someone heeds the warning.

one for you nineteen for me wrote:

And I was wrong about Obama going back to 28%. His plan calls for increasing only up to 20%. Oh, the horror!

Actually, his plan was originally to take it to 28%, but he has since dropped it. Not sure why that is or if he really means it.

iflyboats wrote:

The 10% tithe is an archaic religious tradition. That's 10% of your work life that you'll never get back.

when that came into existence, the ancient Hebrew nation was a theocracy, so that was your taxes

nowadays taxes are around what 33% (10% seems cheap by comparison)

and some european nations have as high as 60%

The stark reality is that taxes are going up in one form or another, whomever gets elected (though some policies are more judicious than others). The auto companies are certainly going to get their handouts on the back of all this recent government socialism, as they reside in an electoral swing state, the airline companies won't be too far behind, and healthcare will become another GSE-type boondoggle. You can count on it. The left will hold sway no matter what. They already are, and I suppose that's typical of a great many economic empires whose halcyon days have passed them by. Pretty sad that we are going to be fighting over how to divide up a dwindling pie, as if though that will relieve the burden of the middle class and "correct" socioeconomic stratification.

it is sad...it happens to all economies we are just a few hundred years behind the european countries...

Read this before you give to any "charity":

http://philanthropy.com/free/articles/v15/i24/24002701.htm

Dont blow your hard earned money on this stuff.

I find it funny how often the word "confiscate" is used in reference to taxes.

I certainly can't make a case for the government using money wisely, especially nowadays, but I suppose you'd rather we not have any military, school funding, roads, research grants, etc.

The Manhattan project and Apollo missions, back when the U.S. had a clear lead in science, technology, and innovation, were government funded projects. Taxes are not the total black hole you all make them out to be.

We have a representative government, and if it consists of a bunch of greedy, corrupt, self-entitled and worthless pigs, take a look around and ask yourself whether or it is simply representative of the people.

You're all the kind of people who whine about the impoverished people who live month to month on public assistance, and yet shoot down every school levy and constructive social service that might actually give them a snowball's chance to obtain any remotely useful job skills. If you ever spend time around those folks you'd see that while a lot of them are where they are for a reason, a great many would gladly work for a way out if they had any visibility and guidance as to how in the world that could be achieved. And yes, for every ninety nine who end up as criminals or layabouts, there is the one who overcame all and justifies the system because if that one did it, all the rest should pull up their bootstraps and make something of themselves. It doesn't work that way.

Count yourself lucky that you were born where and to whom you were - for most of you anyway - because given those circumstances you'd probably be in the same place.

Absolutely make sure the charities you'd give to are thoroughly vetted, but do something nice for someone who can't pay you back - you might find you like it.

QFE! POD! ILA*!

*I Love Acronyms