Participants
Data came from the 2014 General Social Survey (GSS) in which 2,538 participants responded, through computer assisted personal interviewing. For the questions on the generosity category, there were only 1,270 responses, as not every respondent was asked those specific questions.
Dependent Variables
The two variables of interest to this study were on generosity in terms of both volunteerism and philanthropy. Respondents were presented with “During the past 12 months, how often have you done each of the following things: Done volunteer work for a charity? … Given money to a charity?” Applicable answers for both questions ranged from: more than once a week, once a week, once a month, at least 2 or 3 times in the past year, once in the past year to not at all in the past year; also included were “don’t know” and “no answer”.
Independent and Control Variables
The independent variables utilized included age, race, sex, years of education, religion, marital status, and general happiness. Most of those are considered core demographic factors for any study, thus no explanation is needed, with the exception of happiness. Happiness was included because of the supposed relationship between happiness and generosity; research has stated that volunteering makes people happy and that happy people volunteer more. For this research, no control variables were used as the interest was in seeing the effect, of lack thereof, of all variables on the dependent variables. Thus,
Anne Frank once said, “no one has ever become poor by giving.” “Giving” incorporates so many things: giving money, giving food, giving clothes, giving gifts, etc. Personally, I see time as the most significant thing one can give to others. Volunteering is, at its core, giving your time to help others. Volunteering has always been a big part of my life; at a younger age I would help the ladies in the cafeteria serve lunch after Sunday school and clean up the main hall afterwards, in high school I was in organizations that presented me with ample opportunities to volunteer, and presently I still manage to volunteer every semester in college.
Volunteering has been an essential part of my life in the past few years. As an immigrant to Canada, I deemed it my responsibility to serve my community here and back home. Hence when I got ample of opportunities to get involved I always seized them.
In the sense of the word, charity, means to be generous with one’s own resources, not out of a sense of pity but out of a sense of a relationship with and concern for others (Jeavons, p. 207). Nonprofit organizations depend on the generosity of their supporters, which they get by showing their generosity to others as well. For example, when I held an internship with the William and Lanaea C. Featherstone Foundation, one key element my boss etched into our brains was that if you do not show generosity to others you will not receive it back. This was done at our nonprofit by going to every event by supporting every organization that generously donated to us. We showed our gratitude with our presence and charity to organizations that showed it to us. In my opinion, reciprocation of generous actions is what an ethical practice in nonprofits delivers
The next virtue, generosity is as important to the happiness and well being of a man’s mind as a hearty meal and exercise are to a man’s body. Without selflessness comes a loss of community and consequently, with a loss of community comes a decline in quality of life. With generosity, however, comes selflessness. The fulfillment that is gained from helping another human being is one of the purest forms of happiness that can be achieved. It is a broad, communal happiness that enriches the hearts of all involved. To live the good life is to be morally upright and to be morally upright is to help those around you simply in debt to the fact they need help, even if it is at some cost to you. Putting generosity on the backburner shows a wanting of concern for the well-being of the community and therefore obstructs happiness and delayed one's chance to taste the “good life.” from a utilitarian perspective a dismissal of generosity when generosity is possible can be akin to murder. Peter Singer gives a bright example of this when he equates not donating to a child in need to taking a child’s life for the purpose of trafficking their organs (Source 2). While one has a more sinister, direct, and clear motive with the other being
Philanthropy is giving back to the community and ensuring a positive difference in another’s life. I have been tutoring in my community through the National Honor Society and volunteering in the local area soup kitchen.
However, my thought was changed by the first sentence that the author stated “the effects of giving as we age are especially dramatic” (Huffington, 2015, p. 240). I realize that this is about the love of giving afterward. When we are giving, we are also spreading and sharing love with others. Moreover, I feel when we are little as a kid, we tend to give more than we are in the older age; maybe this is why children are always happier than adults. The message from this section sticks out to me because of the statistical findings shows that more than 75% of the employees who had volunteered said they felt healthier; more than 90% said volunteering had put them in a better mood, and more than 75% reported experiencing less stress (Huffington, 2015, p. 241). I have no idea there are many benefits when we give or volunteer until I read this message. I believe I can use this to improve my relationships with others by volunteering in the community such as help the elders or the children and affect others to give as well. A relationship can be built up by giving, which also gives me the opportunities to become friends with others. Moreover, giving expands my relationships within the social
Next, Szalavitz bolsters her previous statement that people can benefit from selfless acts by presenting statistics and facts discovered by a study from BMC Public Health. To give the reader a sense of reality, Szalavitz offers a reminder that genuine and regular benevolence is required to reap such rewards. Next, she mentions a few more health benefits that one can acquire from helping others before describing the harm it can incur. Szalavitz continues her argument by describing a more general danger of benevolence and recognizes the limited verification of the research findings. She concludes the article with statistics of how people are being encouraged to volunteer around the world and establishes the purpose of helping others in the first
These questions flush out the motivations and values underlying the gift and reveal its intent. Understanding each other’s personalities, the compatibility of goals, and the interpersonal abilities helps participants collaborate for the benefit of a shared vision. The philosophy behind your giving can become vulnerable and unprotected without a clearly defined intent. Trust agreements, wills, and articles of incorporation may be insufficient to ensure fidelity to your philanthropic mission. Donors investing the necessary time to consider these questions lay a strong foundation for defining a shared vision and framework that will help fuel the act of giving, in a manner that is both constructive and enduring for generations.
The word is so ambiguous to everyone in society. Many view charity as giving back to those in need because they feel as though they are “bettering the community” in one small way. However, those receiving, can see it as pity or shameful action. We see this throughout The Grapes of Wrath as well, the receiving end of the generosity is interpreted differently than those giving out. In today’s society, it’s programmed into us that if you don’t partake in charitable actions, you aren’t considered a “good samaritan”. If you aren’t helping, what are you doing? Some people today, are being “generous” for all the wrong reasons: to fulfill volunteer hours or doing it to set an image. We need to people to check their moral intentions before believing they are “helping” the community. In other words, people can do more damage to others when having the wrong intentions when it comes to charitable work. If we don’t, we create a society who pities those who suffer in order to boost one’s ego. Now. Reflect on how you are “bettering” the
The United States is a country of volunteers. In 2002-2003, 64 million Americans (28.8 percent of those 16 and older) donated 52 hours a year, the equivalent of more than one full work week, to building shelters, coaching Little League, caring for the elderly, teaching literacy, and countless other community-minded pursuits. Statistics show in Source F that “groups mandatory and nonvolunteers – were less likely to volunteer 8 years after high school than persons who strongly encouraged to volunteer or did it for strictly voluntary reason (43 percent).”
The challenges involved in accounting for charitable activities revolves around many special factors that distinguish the two types of organizations. First, charitable activities are always given to a single set of beneficiaries using resources that are donated by unrelated parties. The stewardship element of financial reporting becomes quite vital because the donor wants to get the assurance that their gift was put to the intended purpose (Burks, 2015). Financial reporting is the conduit through which transparency is created for donors and the nonprofit organization is held publically accountable. It is only through financial reporting that they get the assurance that may encourage them to donate more funds when they find out that their money or resource is put to the right use and managed well (Reheul, Van Caneghem, & Verbruggen,
The author’s outcome of this study was biased because of the limitations that were involved. Culture Competence was not introduced in this study among assumptions provided by the authors. The authors provided evidence based studies throughout this study and their expectations were based upon utilizing Bowgetts study and identifying the correlation between volunteerism and community integration. Next, there are consistencies between this study and Bowgetts’ study of homeless volunteers, such as, homeless persons giving back and using volunteerism to increase employment. Lastly, there is a higher rate among the individuals who are homeless, as well as, disabled that volunteer than the non-homeless general
This research is being conducted to investigate volunteer motivation, satisfactions and dissatisfactions. As is stated by Becsi et al (2008), much of the literature in the social sciences focuses on predicting volunteering behaviour with underlying theories of resources availability.
Starting in 1972, the General Social Survey (GSS) used a four-category response scale for respondents to answer a question on how they view their own health, known as the self-reported health question (SRH) (Smith 2005, 1). The four-categories used were: poor, fair, good, and excellent (Smith et al. 2017, 385) Starting in 2002, the GSS started using both a four and five-category scale for people to respond to the SRH (Smith et al. 2017,1537). The five-category scale used the same measures from the four-category scale, but also included “very good” as the fifth option. The question is: which response category form gives a better ability to determine SRH among people?
Nevertheless, the common misconception linked to graduating College students is that they are well-rounded adults, who have done their time and are ready and able to enter the working force and go on with their lives. The fact of the matter is that not all recent college students are mature and knowledgeable on their community and the world at large. “Teens who volunteer increase their knowledge of the world and the problems that face it” (“Youths”). This quote is not only applicable to teens, but college students as well; unfortunately, college students become isolated from the rest of the world while they are in their course of study and do not make time to give back to the community that helped them become who they are.