I recently conducted an experiment in politics. It wasn't intended as an experiment, but as it turned out, the results were interesting.

I work for a relatively small business. It has about 25 employees. The average pay is 9.50 an hour. The business is what is known as a "group home", where we care for young males who have gotten into various kinds of trouble. Because the facility is open 24 hours per day, we work in shifts that run 2-3 days, and require many of us to stay overnite. Inevitably, the employees get to know each other on a much more personal basis than would normally be expected at a more typical job.

One of the guys who works for the group home is not an American citizen. He is from Australia, but is married to an American woman. They have one daughter who just turned one year old. The guy is around 40. He had an accident in Australia just before he turned 20, and he lost his left leg at the knee. As it turns out, his artificial leg has reached the end of its usefulness, and he now needs a new leg. The old one has gotten so bad that he is scared to carry his baby daughter in his arms, as the doctor has made it clear that his artificial leg could totally give out at any time.

For various reasons (not the least of which is the fact that he only makes 9.00 an hour), the guy is in a position right now where he does not have a lot of money. Even with the insurance provided through our employer, a new leg will cost hom 3500 dollars... and the guy simply cannot afford it.

So three weeks ago, I took it upon myself to raise money for the guy's new leg. He has been working at the agency for a little over a year, and he is well liked. He and I have also gotten to be very good friends. So I personally approached every employee of the company, and pitched them for money. Last Wednesday, I received the final donation that put us over the top, and we paid for his new leg in full this last Friday. The guy couldn't believe it- as you can imagine, he was very moved and very happy.

Now I told you all that to tell you this. Here is where it gets interesting.

As I said before, because of the length of the shifts, we get to know each other very well at this job, including each others' personal politics. I was the person who was soliciting the donations, and I was the person that people actually handed the money to. I am the only person who knows exactly who gave how much. And it was the conservatives, both religious and political, who instantly reached for their checkbooks when I approached them about donating. Four or five of them even made a point of asking me to approach them again if we came up short. The liberals, on the other hand, showed a great deal of hesitation. Almost to a person, their initial response was to ask me if we had yet sought the services of any particular government programs or agencies. They ultimately ended up contributing, but their donations averaged about one-third of the average conservative.

There was only one employee who did not contribute; it happened to be the employee who is most active in the advocacy of social programs, and who frequently works with organizations like Head Start and Habitat for Humanity. This particular employee, who is normally known for her compassion and generosity, actually was heard to complain that we "were doing it all wrong" and "should have asked for help from some official sources."

The two most conservative and religious employees donated 300 dollars each the moment they were approached. The director of the program, who is a millionaire and very politically active in the local Democratic Party, was the only person who I approached and asked for a specific amount; knowing how wealthy he was, I asked him to match my personal donation of 500 dollars. Instead, he waited three weeks until he knew that we were within a couple of hundred dollars of our goal. Then he donated 100 dollars at the last minute; suspecting that his donation had been the one to put us over the top, he then started spreading the word that "we did it!"

For the record, I do not believe that the issue is one of generosity or stinginess; I do not believe that the conservatives are "kinder" than the liberals. Rather, I think the trend is a result of how government and its role is perceived by the individual. The liberals in the group definitely feel that it is the government's obligation to provide charity; the conservatives in the group, especially the church-goers, feel an individual responsibility to give. They are also used to the idea of helping out individual people in their respective congregations. I suspect that the liberals would have felt much more comfortable donating to some faceless beauracracy. (This idea was reinforced this morning when my boss made a point of mentioning that he was sending 200 dollars to the "Keep Tahoe Blue" campaign.) I suspect that when it gets down to it, the liberals don't trust the individual to do the right thing if given money, but for some reason they trust a large group (i.e. government) to do the right thing if they are given the money. I must admit I don't get the logic of it... but there it is.

__________________
"There is a general place in your brain, I think, reserved for 'melancholy of relationships past'. It grows and prospers as life progresses, forcing you finally, against your better judgment, to listen to country music".- Kary Mullis, Nobel Prize Winner for Chemistry

Danky ... GREAT POST!

Actually, there isn't any logic to it that I can see. The Libbies do rely on government because they have no faith in their fellow man to be charitible. They have been proven wrong on this issue over and over. The odd part is, they never consider that those government agencies they rely upon, take a healthy brokerage fee out of every donation they recieve. Private enterprise, charitable or not, can always do things more efficiently than government entities.

Vi

__________________
Liberals are people that will believe anything twice.

So your saying lets privatize Taxation, No chance of any ripping off there eh. I'll bet you had stock in Enron and won't admit it. At least with the govt. we can change the players, in the private sector, you gets what they gives you. When they privatize my social security and my checks get lowered or taken away completely, I'll be on their doorstep with a few weapons that will make the McDonalds massacare look like a christmas play. Don't fuck with my earned Social Security. I need it to survive. If you fuck with it, I'll definently fuck with who's responsible!

__________________
Life is good, the water is sweet. The ground keeps moving beneath my feet.

The bottom line here is not whether you're a liberal or a conservative. It's whether you're stingy or not. In my humble opinion, Rich people are more stingy than middle class or poor people in general. In fact being stingy is sometimes a contributing factor in obtaining wealth!

__________________
Life is good, the water is sweet. The ground keeps moving beneath my feet.

"The bottom line here is not whether you're a liberal or a conservative. It's whether you're stingy or not."

Well, that may be the way you see it, Med. I see it more like this: The bottlm line is whether you are for more government intrusion into our lives or less. Which viewpoint fosters liberty and which one fosters totalitarianism?

Vi

__________________
Liberals are people that will believe anything twice.

Vi you're like a broken record. You have a one track mind. You said you like beating me up intellectually, but all you do is rant about how much government is screwing up your life. Get a grip, there are more interesting things going on!

__________________
Life is good, the water is sweet. The ground keeps moving beneath my feet.

Danky, Thanks for the brilliant post!

My life experience has always had me suspect that the more right leaning religious types were, indeed, apparently more generous!

__________________
If you wind up with a boring, miserable life because you listened to your mom, your dad, your teacher, your priest or some guy on TV telling you how to do your shit, then YOU DESERVE IT.
~ Frank Zappa ~

Liberty means responsibility, that is why most men dread it.
~George Bernard Shaw~

The key word here is apparantly. One more thing, those that have more are more able to give, if you're scrimping on groceries, its hard to give to charity!

__________________
Life is good, the water is sweet. The ground keeps moving beneath my feet.

"One more thing, those that have more are more able to give, if you're scrimping on groceries, its hard to give to charity!"

Play it again, Sam. Oh, you just did.

Vi

__________________
Liberals are people that will believe anything twice.

I guess you've never been poor or if you have you've definently forgotten what it was like.So there is no use arguing with you. If you don't get what scrimping for groceries means, then you are lost. I remember when I was young, with 4 brothers and 1 sister, we ate a lot of what my mom called slumgullion. that was pretty much what ever there was in the cupboards and fridge all thrown together to make enough for us to eat. Myself, I've never had it that rough since I left home, nor has any of my family, but I remember. There are millions of familys that experience that on a daily basis. It's like: "when your up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to remember you only came here to drain the swamp" The last thing they are thinking is how to feed someone eles' family. I guess you elites don't know anything about this and apparently, don't care to hear about it either. I'm not sniveling for me, I have plenty! in fact I actually eat too much. But when you elites start dissing poor people for their charity aspirations, I must speak out!

__________________
Life is good, the water is sweet. The ground keeps moving beneath my feet.