True confessions time. So, every once in a while I blather on about the idea that one of the big reasons I try so hard to be frugal is so that I can share with others. I talk the talk. Do I walk the walk?
Er, . . . no.
What Mitt Romney and Barack Obama have in common with each other, but not with me, is the number 14%. That's how much of their income they each donated to charity last year, according to their income tax statements, or so I hear. Several religions (including mine) strongly suggest 10% as the minimum magic number (except, of course, we don't say "magic"). I'm not there either.
Even if you just look at the money that makes it into our bank account -- that is, after my employer deducts taxes, retirement, and health insurance costs and then deposits the rest of the moolah for me -- even if you look at that reduced amount as the base, we don't make it to a proper tithe.
What I can say about our expenditures is that we're paying a lot for our moral values. The energy-saving home renovation consumes a vast amount of our take-home pay. Our high-energy boys consume another big chunk. I suppose if we hadn't renovated the home or adopted our kids, we'd find it a lot easier to be as proportionally generous as our two presidential front-runners.
 |
| The break-down of how our take-home pay leaves our home. This doesn't include some large categories: health insurance, retirement, or taxes. |
But for me, that's not really an excuse. In my heart of hearts, what I wish I could do is be a marvelous mom, a perfect professor, an excellent environmentalist . . . and still find a way to put large chunks of my money in the hands of others, making the world a better place. See the pigs flying by?
You shouldn't be so hard with yourself. If you add the 6% of charities to the 9% of childcare and some other aliquot percentages from other pieces of the cake (that you dedicate to your adopted children), you will be well above the 14% of the presidential's income bite.
ReplyDelete