JUDGING CANDIDATES BY THEIR PERSONAL GENEROSITY

11/2/04 | Jim Boldebook

[JimB in Venice]

A review of tax returns can be revealing in terms of character

[JimB in Venice]

While most of news stories and editorials we've seen surrounding John Kerry's and President Bush's tax returns have had to do with the percentage of income tax paid, I found another item on those returns even more revealing of character. Charitable contributions.

Both of these men are relatively affluent and have enjoyed substantial incomes for most of their lives. In the years 1991 to 1995, John Kerry's average percent of charitable contributions reported on his tax returns was less than 1/2 of one percent. LESS THAN ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT! In some years Kerry declared ZERO in charitable contributions on his returns. And of course you know that if Kerry had made contributions he certainly would have claimed them.

On the other hand, President Bush's average contributions over that same period are over 10%... in some years 12% of his income.

How much do you declare in charitable contributions on your tax returns? Do you have any years when you declared ZERO?

I realize that charity should be from the heart and it is really none of my business what another person decides to donate, but I do think it is a deeply revealing factor on the character of these two candidates.

[mrplind]

good insight, God bless Bush

[bushisdamanin04]

Like millionaire Al Gore’s $300 bucks to charity!

Something that got almost no play in the media was Terry Kerry paying only in the 12% bracket, despite her being one of the true super-rich. Terry Kerry paid much less than half of the bracket that people with her money should be paying, and much less than that according to that other Kerry.

[joebuck]

"Do you have any years when you declared ZERO?"

I always declare zero. I don't list my charitable contributions as deductions. I try to do all my contributions annonymously because of Jesus' admonitions in the Sermon on the Mount.

[Dahoser]

I realize that charity should be from the heart and it is really none of my business what another person decides to donate, but I do think it is a deeply revealing factor on the character of these two candidates

Especially when the candidate who is always screaming about people paying more to the government to help those in need is the same candidate who pays less than 1/2 of 1% of his income to charity.

[Asphalt]

That's it. Kerry must have studied the Sermon on the Mount. Now Bush, he never reads his Bible I bet.

[HighlyOpinionated]

If you believe in rendering to Caesar what is his and to G*d what is G*d's, I would imagine you'd always claim your deductions so that you would have MORE to give to G*d.

[Straight Vermonter]

So the good Catholic John Kerry did not tithe? I'm shocked!

[Resolute]

There was a blurb in National Review in the last decade or so contrasting the relative generosity of "liberals" and "conservatives" (using these labels in the modern sense). I have looked on the Internet without success for a reference to this study. It may have specifically contrasted Al Gore with Dan Quayle. At any rate, the study showed that in general, conservatives tends to be about 3-5 times as generous as liberals, when compared at same income levels. The blurb closed with a line to the effect that no wonder liberals think we need more taxes to help those less fortunate -- they assume that everyone else is as stingy (in a voluntary sense) as they are. By this logic, involuntary contribution via taxes must be the only way to negate their own, and everyone else's assumed, stinginess.

[Sgt_Schultze]

Kerry did spend $1 each for those cool yellow "awareness" bracelets. That was his second best investment ever (the Heinz "I do, being the first) - $1 to fool the dems that he really cares.

[StACase]

You people on this thread just don't get it about liberals. Their generosity is to be gauged by how much money they require YOU to give to the government through taxes. They sneer at charity you know.