I know it doesn’t mesh well with your view of Americans (excluding yourself of course) and the United States, as being nothing but a bunch of greedy examples of the failure of capitalism as a system in providing for the needs of people, but it turns out that we really are a generous lot. According to your calculations, you write, wouldn’t it be great if working Americans contributed $3.75 billion a year in humanitarian aid? I’m sure you will be absolutely ecstatic then to discover that private Americans donated over $306 billion to charity in 2007 with more than $95 billion going to “foreign aid to destitute nations.” This amount does not include volunteerism, government aid or military expenditures. No, just those good old greedy bastard American citizens, 75% of whom donate to charity and the nearly 1/2 who participate in volunteer activities.

Surely then, all of this giving must come from people like you, those who clearly see the greed inherent in our capitalist system the need need to ameliorate its ill effects? Well it turns out that those who give most generously, overwhelmingly attend church on a regular basis and are skeptical of government, particularly efforts to “redistribute income.” These must be rich people skewing the numbers, right? Not quite. It appears to be the case regardless of income levels. People more secular in outlook, who believe in significantly increasing the role of government in providing social services, give at substantialy lower rates than their religious and independent counterparts.

What about Europe? With their broad and extensive social services, they surely are more generous than their socialist hating brethren across the pond. Turns out that Americans give more than twice as much as their more caring and compassionate friends in Europe. The Brits donate about 42% as much as Americans, French 26%, Fins 25% and Germans 14%. It appears that when people view the government as the solution to all the ills in society, they become far less generous with their own money.

I don’t bring this up to suggest that we shouldn’t help people in need or dramatically improve our environmental practices. I’m simply pointing out that a) Americans really are a generous and caring people b) Simply arguing for increased taxes and wealth redistribution does not necessarily equal more for the poor of the world. One last note. Karl Marx, who you think was onto something in his critique of capitalism, allowed his family to live in poverty and near starvation, rather than try and work. Turns out he loved them dearly, just not enough to make any personal sacrifices or attempt to provide for them. Probably the reason he believed that people in a free society would do the same. Irony? His family would not have survived at all without the financial help of Engels who was the beneficiary of wealth generated from the family business in good old capitalist England.