It's not really an argument. I just wondered tbf."Hey, but what about those statistics that would support my wafer-thin argument, even though I am unaware of the location,nature or content of those statistics?"
It's not really an argument. I just wondered tbf."Hey, but what about those statistics that would support my wafer-thin argument, even though I am unaware of the location,nature or content of those statistics?"
Evidence?Oh there's no doubt that you get bigots of every political persuasion and I do think it is a myth that the left or some how a nicer bunch of people than the right. However, most acts of charity come from people who aren't loaded. They may not give as much in terms of wealth or time (time perhaps being a more important commodity?) but as group they give more - if that makes sense.
Evidence?
Studies mainly in America, the NY Times had quite a large piece on it last year. Give me a moment to dig it up.
For decades, surveys have shown that upper-income Americans don’t give away as much of their money as they might and are particularly undistinguished as givers when compared with the poor, who are strikingly generous.
...
In 2001, Independent Sector, a nonprofit organization focused on charitable giving, found that households earning less than $25,000 a year gave away an average of 4.2 percent of their incomes; those with earnings of more than $75,000 gave away 2.7 percent.
Evidence?
My OH is fascinating on this stuff, cos it's his job toet analyse that kind of data in the third sector. Not sure if I can persuade him to post this evening though, I think he's done one post about Boris being trapped and has probably had enough for one day
He was also a robber baron who hired people to kill strikers and union organisers.One of the greatest philanthropists of all time Andrew Carnegie (he of the libraries) had some fairly left-wing views about wealth
He was also a robber baron who hired people to kill strikers and union organisers.
Not sure - beyond the normal exploitation at least.Anything nasty in Joseph Rowntree's background?
Anything nasty in Joseph Rowntree's background?
Not sure - beyond the normal exploitation at least.
geminisnake said:Did you ask for an explanation of the thinking behind that?? Think I would have had to.
WTF have tattoos got to do with anything?? They don't have an adverse affect on your health/ability to get a job/life, etc afaik
Quite. Ability to do a job - no problem. Ability to get a job - different story.Plenty of professional jobs would look at visible tattoos as being a negative.
We're getting close to "work for your tesco vouchers in tescos" tbh now. Only difference is the state will be paying and there won't be any need to house your workers either.he was also a megalomaniac who paid his workers in credits which they could only use at the local shop in his pre-built town, Saltaire. if you ever go he has the place surrounded by statues of himself, there's even one in the church - and the whole town had his spies employed and living in the large end-of-terraces at street corners enforcing his often bizarre and authoritarian rules. Saltaire workers lived in something resembling a totalitarian state
Plenty of professional jobs would look at visible tattoos as being a negative.