Chronicle of Philanthropy--giving by zip code

[basilosaurus]

My zip code is made up of hovels, crazy expensive vacation condos, and a shitton of hotels. Should be interesting.

[Deleted]

My zipcode is


Total contributions

$44.2-million



Median contribution

$4,454



Median discretionary income

$74,719



Percent of income given

6.0%

I'm a little surprise it is so low since people are so religious and belong to a lot of churches that require/recommend tithing

[sunny]

thank you for posting!

[GailGoldie]

very cool to see.

interesting for sure. i'm happy to see that we gave more than the average for the state of NJ!

[basilosaurus]

OK, looked up my zipcode. Average is 4.8%. What surprises me is that in the 50k-99k range, it was 7% with discretionary income of $24k but in the 200k+ range, it was 3% with discretionary income over 600,000!

So, they gave 3 times as much (about 1500 vs 4500), but have 25 times more discretionary income. I just can't wrap my brain around that. I hope it's some weird quirk related to my neighborhood being strange with so much tourism and so many foreign property owners.

[charlatti]

Interesting related article: Rich Enclaves Are Not as Generous as the Wealthy Living Elsewhere philanthropy.com/article/Rich-Enclaves-Are-Not-as/133595/

[heightsyankee]

It makes me kind of happy that my neighborhood, which is gentrifying so mostly upper income but still A LOT of working class families in the zip code, gives about 3% more than the uber wealthy neighborhood a couple miles away.

[basilosaurus]

I would guess some of them are income rentals, so they'd file some sort of return, right?

But, I guess my zip isn't unique as I looked up some other zips I've lived in and seen those same discrepancies. One area of Ft Laud that has crazy expensive property was wildly unbalanced. If you have an extra million, you'd think you could give more than 3%, no? Especially if the "poor" folks living down the street can give 12%.

[wawa]

Interesting. I live right near the line between a majority white area and a majority black area. The higher income level percent donated stays about the same no matter which side of the line you're on. But the 50,000 - 99,000 percentage jumps a substantial amount when you cross into the majority black area.

[dev22]

4.1%. Which is sad considering the area I live in.

[LoveTrains]

Yeah....I work in fundraising in the metro area that came up dead last (of the 50 most populous metro areas).

I am so fucked this year.

[Michelle]

I have had a very long day, so please forgive me and explain to me like I'm a 3 year old.

Where do I enter my zip code?

I'm looking all over the page and cannot find it. I'm embarassed.

ETA- found it. My browser on my work laptop is out of date and i'm too lazy to go get on the home computer. I'll look tomorrow.

[meshaliuknits]

5.2%, $7.2 mil given for my zip. I didn't realize my zip included the point, which ups the incomes.

[GailGoldie]

no mention of red/blue states and giving in the comments?

[marie427]

The poorer ZIP code areas in my borough donate more of their income than the richer ZIP code areas. Very interesting.

[basilosaurus]

Aug 24, 2012 18:17:37 GMT -5 marie427 said:

The poorer ZIP code areas in my borough donate more of their income than the richer ZIP code areas. Very interesting.

That was the case in 5/5 zip codes I looked up. So, no, I'm not going to make assumptions about red/blue, but I will make assumptions about greedy rich people

[SusanBAnthony]

What does discretionary income mean, exactly? How do they define that?

My county is 64k of discretionary income, and 4.6% of income.

What percentage do you think people "should" give, on average? 10%? More? Less?

[makemineadouble]

Aug 24, 2012 17:14:57 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

no mention of red/blue states and giving in the comments?

What do you think about it?

[StrawberryBlondie]

My zip code:

53,910 median income
4.2% of income given to charity

This is apparently up from my state - 4.1%.

[GailGoldie]

Aug 24, 2012 18:46:00 GMT -5 makemineadouble said:

Aug 24, 2012 17:14:57 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

no mention of red/blue states and giving in the comments?

What do you think about it?

I think that 1-8 of the top 10 giving states are red. Says a lot about the simple difference in philosophy about how to help others... red = let the people help each other. Blue = let govn't help.

Greedy rich?? NJ is always in the top couple states for wealth... 9th up from the bottom.... Blue state.

[LoveTrains]

Aug 24, 2012 20:58:53 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

Aug 24, 2012 18:46:00 GMT -5 makemineadouble said:

What do you think about it?

I think that 1-8 of the top 10 giving states are red. Says a lot about the simple difference in philosophy about how to help others... red = let the people help each other. Blue = let govn't help.
.

I disagree. Churches are the biggest recipient of charitable dollars in the US and I think it just shows the states that are more religious and has more churchgoers as well as Christian denominations that encourage 10% tithing.

[Deleted]

Aug 26, 2012 6:45:16 GMT -5 LoveTrains said:

Aug 24, 2012 20:58:53 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

I think that 1-8 of the top 10 giving states are red. Says a lot about the simple difference in philosophy about how to help others... red = let the people help each other. Blue = let govn't help.
.

I disagree. Churches are the biggest recipient of charitable dollars in the US and I think it just shows the states that are more religious and has more churchgoers as well as Christian denominations that encourage 10% tithing.

This. And apparently all those people claiming to tithe ten percent in my area aren't... since our rate of giving was well below 10% of discretionary income.

I think Chronicle has shown if you take out church giving the northeast is the most generous (giving to arts, education, medicine, etc)

[GailGoldie]

I find it funny that you want to dismiss church giving. Yes, some of it goes to keep the church running, but a huge amount goes to help those in need in the area, country, other countries, etc. My church gives to many charities in the area that help the needy (that are NOT part of our church).

[Deleted]

Aug 26, 2012 7:21:11 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

I find it funny that you want to dismiss church giving. Yes, some of it goes to keep the church running, but a huge amount goes to help those in need in the area, country, other countries, etc. My church gives to many charities in the area that help the needy (that are NOT part of our church).

I disagree. Most of it goes to keeping the church going and paying pastoral staff. I went to many vestry meetings in a former life.

[GailGoldie]

Aug 26, 2012 7:41:34 GMT -5 @septimus said:

Aug 26, 2012 7:21:11 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

I find it funny that you want to dismiss church giving. Yes, some of it goes to keep the church running, but a huge amount goes to help those in need in the area, country, other countries, etc. My church gives to many charities in the area that help the needy (that are NOT part of our church).

I disagree. Most of it goes to keeping the church going and paying pastoral staff. I went to many vestry meetings in a former life.

perhaps in your church. But not mine. I was a council member for many years.... not that you have to be one to see the budget, which is handed out to the entire congregation a few times/year. We have one pastor + a secretary + custodian... that is all of our paid staff, and they don't make much.

Not to mention all of the man hours that are "donated" from our church to help those in need... the countless food drives that don't get reported as donations... and more, that are organized by the church.

[Deleted]

Aug 26, 2012 7:58:13 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

Aug 26, 2012 7:41:34 GMT -5 @septimus said:

I disagree. Most of it goes to keeping the church going and paying pastoral staff. I went to many vestry meetings in a former life.

perhaps in your church. But not mine. I was a council member for many years.... not that you have to be one to see the budget, which is handed out to the entire congregation a few times/year. We have one pastor + a secretary + custodian... that is all of our paid staff, and they don't make much.

Not to mention all of the man hours that are "donated" from our church to help those in need... the countless food drives that don't get reported as donations... and more, that are organized by the church.

but the OPs link is counting volunteer hours, it is only showing monetary donations and I do claim my food donations on my tax returns.

I think as far as churches as charities, if any secular charity had the overhead/administrative expenses a church has you wouldn't donate.

[summer]

Aug 24, 2012 20:58:53 GMT -5 GailGoldie said:

Aug 24, 2012 18:46:00 GMT -5 makemineadouble said:

What do you think about it?

I think that 1-8 of the top 10 giving states are red. Says a lot about the simple difference in philosophy about how to help others... red = let the people help each other. Blue = let govn't help.

Greedy rich?? NJ is always in the top couple states for wealth... 9th up from the bottom.... Blue state.

I don't believe in leaving it up to people because I don't trust them to do anything regularly, or in times when they need their own money.

And I absolutely believe people will only give to people they like or who are like them. I believe if any giving is to be done, the gov't will do a better job at equitable distribution then regular people on a long-term basis because I at least have half a say with my vote. Maybe I'm both cynical and naive.

[basilosaurus]

If you take out church giving from that data, the northeast (ie, blue) states give most.

[LoveTrains]

We will have to agree to disagree - my mother is a pastor and at least in her denomination, in our area, most church money goes to operations - pastor salary, keeping the lights on, maintaining old and expensive buildings, etc. sure there is other stuff they do - like run a food bank - but that is minuscule on the budget line bc of all the volunteer hours and donated food.