Thailand Tops World's Most Generous

[DocN]

Well done Thailand

Thailand must also top the charts in accommodating the most negative, angry, sticky farang community in the world who wouldn't give 1 single baht to any charity (but if they did you would never hear the end of it) yet happily blow 100's/night drinking chang outside of the cheapest joints in town while groaning on about what is wrong in Thailand because they so clever and know everything...about nothing

Yep...made my donations on may causes ...because I am such a rich motherf@cker- farang!

Every month, my company drives my salary up to my mansion in three 8-wheelers and I have have naked poor Thais shovel it into my garden, where it is counted and bundeled by 50 Thai- virgins in Bunny- costumes!

F.e. I donated a lot to flood charity...just to learn that, if I had been flooded, no one actually would officially help me!

Why?

Because I am farang and so filthy rich, that everybody expects me to help myself!

And by the way: if I go out and spend 100s on beer (and drugs and champagne and hookers, with all my other stinking rich farang friends)...guess which country benefits from that?

Oh yeah...Thailand!

Why is it so hard for you to understand, that actually one or two people might question the validity of this statistic, especially when no one explains, if donating to temples is included?

Some people actually READ the news and THINK about it!

And if a question arises, they actually want answers.

Too hard to understand?

Than maybe stay off a discussion board or contribute something of value instead of playing the usual "grumpy farang"- card!

That would be "well done Thailand"!

[Payboy]

Well done Thailand

Thailand must also top the charts in accommodating the most negative, angry, sticky farang community in the world who wouldn't give 1 single baht to any charity (but if they did you would never hear the end of it) yet happily blow 100's/night drinking chang outside of the cheapest joints in town while groaning on about what is wrong in Thailand because they so clever and know everything...about nothing

Yep...made my donations on may causes ...because I am such a rich motherf@cker- farang!

Every month, my company drives my salary up to my mansion in three 8-wheelers and I have have naked poor Thais shovel it into my garden, where it is counted and bundeled by 50 Thai- virgins in Bunny- costumes!

F.e. I donated a lot to flood charity...just to learn that, if I had been flooded, no one actually would officially help me!

Why?

Because I am farang and so filthy rich, that everybody expects me to help myself!

And by the way: if I go out and spend 100s on beer (and drugs and champagne and hookers, with all my other stinking rich farang friends)...guess which country benefits from that?

Oh yeah...Thailand!

Why is it so hard for you to understand, that actually one or two people might question the validity of this statistic, especially when no one explains, if donating to temples is included?

Some people actually READ the news and THINK about it!

And if a question arises, they actually want answers.

Too hard to understand?

Than maybe stay off a discussion board or contribute something of value instead of playing the usual "grumpy farang"- card!

That would be "well done Thailand"!

Well said.

[khaowong1]

It all depends what they qualify as 'charitable donations'?

If it includes tambon at a temple then that is so ingrained in Thai culture then they would be ranked very highly. If it is just 'giving' then I don't see it - most Thai's I come across just look after themselves and their family.

Indeed - they haven't got a pot to piss in but still feel obligated to answer the call of the saffron robe.

Hey, go easy on the saffron robe guys, ok? I'm one of them. :-)

[Roj]

The ordinary Thai can be kind, extraordinarily generous and seek no acclaim for their gift. Unfortunately, as we have seen from the flooding, large Thai companies want to be seen on TV handing over the cheque rather than quietly and anonymously donating. For them there is always a price to pay for their generosity.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Roj

[wxyz]

and china is ranked 140th

[anterian]

Might I suggest that the lesson of the widow's mite should be factored into any act of charity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow's_mite

I say this not as a Christian, I am not, but as an observer of the human condition

[BigJohnnyBKK]

What are the criteria here? What qualifies as a charitable donation?

In the case of Thailand, it no doubt includes donations to temples, which are almost certainly the biggest form of donations here. This is a traditional ritual custom in which -- even if it comes from the heart in many cases -- the money just goes to one more piece of superstition-fuelling architecture.

In the USA, it probably includes all those massive institutional donations. If you're looking for heartfelt charity from ordinary people to other people who are suffering from misfortune or disadvantage, which is the real measure of a nation's charitableness, you should probably look at the Irish and people like them.

Ignorant prejudice - Americans as individuals are by far the most generous in the world, supported by many thorough and objective research studies. It's a fact, accept it.

Of course, part of it is that they can afford to be, which further highlights how important this would be an indicator about Thai culture if accurate.

But both do include religious donations, which of course many cynics would not want counted, but to a large extent does go to help the poor. Just as an example, many of the best schools and hospitals in what used to be called the third worlds were founded by churches; many have since become mostly commercial operations, but they develop infrastructure where otherwise there would have been none.

A very high percentage of Americans still tithe - give a fixed percentage, traditionally 10% of their income to their religion. In fact there is a strong movement among humanist atheists to do the same to secular charities.

Corporate giving may be relatively high, but is very much dwarfed by individual contributions. Same with government support of charity, but of course this comes from common people's taxes, and is a result of the same cultural ideas and feelings, not as if bureaucrats are more idealistic than the regular people.

Now my turn to be cynical - is there a scheme here for backhanders to be disguised as charitable donations? Just asking. . .

I also have direct experience of what I consider to be a remarkable fact - the most generous people here are the poorest, and not just in supporting their close family network.

Ultimately people who say that those who give to others are really only helping themselves are absolutely right. Too many stupid people don't realize that being selfish is a lose-lose proposition.

[binjalin]

It all depends what they qualify as 'charitable donations'?

If it includes tambon at a temple then that is so ingrained in Thai culture then they would be ranked very highly. If it is just 'giving' then I don't see it - most Thai's I come across just look after themselves and their family.

Indeed - they haven't got a pot to piss in but still feel obligated to answer the call of the saffron robe.

Hey, go easy on the saffron robe guys, ok? I'm one of them. :-)

There was no suggestion in my post that I in any way felt that this was wrong - I support it when it actually is given with right intention but I was just postulating that the statistic may include such donations and,as this was 'cultural' in many resects, can skew the figuers.

I observe that Thais can be generous and giving - but not always and especially not when driving!

[xthAi76s]

Might I suggest that the lesson of the widow's mite should be factored into any act of charity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow's_mite

I say this not as a Christian, I am not, but as an observer of the human condition

Yes, +1.

[xthAi76s]

What are the criteria here? What qualifies as a charitable donation?

In the case of Thailand, it no doubt includes donations to temples, which are almost certainly the biggest form of donations here. This is a traditional ritual custom in which -- even if it comes from the heart in many cases -- the money just goes to one more piece of superstition-fuelling architecture.

In the USA, it probably includes all those massive institutional donations. If you're looking for heartfelt charity from ordinary people to other people who are suffering from misfortune or disadvantage, which is the real measure of a nation's charitableness, you should probably look at the Irish and people like them.

Ignorant prejudice - Americans as individuals are by far the most generous in the world, supported by many thorough and objective research studies. It's a fact, accept it.

Of course, part of it is that they can afford to be, which further highlights how important this would be an indicator about Thai culture if accurate.

But both do include religious donations, which of course many cynics would not want counted, but to a large extent does go to help the poor. Just as an example, many of the best schools and hospitals in what used to be called the third worlds were founded by churches; many have since become mostly commercial operations, but they develop infrastructure where otherwise there would have been none.

A very high percentage of Americans still tithe - give a fixed percentage, traditionally 10% of their income to their religion. In fact there is a strong movement among humanist atheists to do the same to secular charities.

Corporate giving may be relatively high, but is very much dwarfed by individual contributions. Same with government support of charity, but of course this comes from common people's taxes, and is a result of the same cultural ideas and feelings, not as if bureaucrats are more idealistic than the regular people.

Now my turn to be cynical - is there a scheme here for backhanders to be disguised as charitable donations? Just asking. . .

I also have direct experience of what I consider to be a remarkable fact - the most generous people here are the poorest, and not just in supporting their close family network.

Ultimately people who say that those who give to others are really only helping themselves are absolutely right. Too many stupid people don't realize that being selfish is a lose-lose proposition.

And, yes, as well. +1.

Many of us seem to understand that along with feeling positive towards positive developments in Thailand (or anywhere else on our shared planet), we should always take a few moments to ponder 1) if things we read/hear/otherwise become aware of are trustworthy and 2) what the true meaning of any development really is.

After all, being thinking and questioning beings is one of the core traits which has brought the world Western and much of Eastern civilization. We need to look at our world critically if we are to continue to crawl, scratch and bite our way toward better civilization.

[rijb]

The report - which is compiled by CAF using Gallup polling information on the charitable behaviour of people in 153 nations - is based on three measures. These are ‘giving money’, ‘volunteering time’ and ‘helping a stranger’. The global average of the three giving behaviours in 2011 was 32.4%, compared to 31.6% in 2010.

https://www.cafonline.org/media-office/press-releases/2011/dec-2011/uk-fifth-most-charitable.aspx

[Thai at Heart]

Percentage of people giving by population? Interesting statistic. How on earth would you measure it? And to not count donating to the temple is pretty disingenuous, since there are millions of people around the world who give to churches and religious organisations, so to not include temple donations would make comparing apples and apples almost impossible on a global basis.

[xthAi76s]

The report - which is compiled by CAF using Gallup polling information on the charitable behaviour of people in 153 nations - is based on three measures. These are ‘giving money’, ‘volunteering time’ and ‘helping a stranger’. The global average of the three giving behaviours in 2011 was 32.4%, compared to 31.6% in 2010.

https://www.cafonlin...charitable.aspx

So, as suspected and in other words, about as likely to be accurate as a global polling on p*n*s size ...

[Aurer]

It's ridiculous to know that westerners believe that giving money is the best ( and for some people it's only ) way to express generousity. For buddhists, there are many forms of "Namjai" not only giving money, helping strangers and volunteer.

Many of the best schools and hospitals in what used to be called the third worlds were founded by churches : Because they want to convert locals to Christians.

Americans as individuals are by far the most generous in the world, supported by many thorough and objective research studies. It's a fact, accept it. Lets see

For example,

Americans earn 30,000 per month and donate 10 percent of the income ( 3,000 )

Sri Langkans earn 500 each month and donate 10 percent ( 50 )

Apparently, Americans donate much more money than Sri Langkans in amount BUT

Sri Langkans don't even have enough money for food but they still donate.

Who is more generous?

Edited December 23, 2011 by Aurer

[xthAi76s]

It's ridiculous to know that westerners believe that giving money is the best ( and for some people it's only ) way to express generousity. For buddhists, there are many forms of "Namjai" not only giving money, helping strangers and volunteer.

The CAF report tries to measure three giving behaviors: 1) giving money, 2) volunteering time, and 3) helping a stranger. It is limited and does not seek to try to quantify all forms of "namjai" around the world. How would you measure such a statistic? It's impossible. So, the categories must be limited. And, even then, the results must be judged for their likely lack of anything approaching accuracy since they are self-reported.

Hmmm, OK RE Buddhism. Christianity also encourages all kinds of acts of kindness as do other religions and even moral frameworks outside of religion... So, I'm not sure what you're trying to express here. What you're saying seems to be irrelevant.

Many of the best schools and hospitals in what used to be called the third worlds were founded by churches : Because they want to convert locals to Christians.

Some of the posters in this thread (including me) have been discussing this idea of intent. You are saying that Christians who help (building churches, schools and hospitals) only do so because they want something in return which is to convert non-Christians to Christianity. You're saying that their intent is selfish. You are further implying that one's intent is important in an act of giving. So, then, tell me, why do Buddhists give? Why would people perform acts of "namjai"? And, what would you say is the correct intent? I think you'll find this a very difficult question to answer.

So, the point is that it's easier not to worry about why a person gives and indeed this particular CAF report does not consider intent as a factor.

Americans as individuals are by far the most generous in the world, supported by many thorough and objective research studies. It's a fact, accept it. Lets see

For example,

Americans earn 30,000 per month and donate 10 percent of the income ( 3,000 )

Sri Langkans earn 500 each month and donate 10 percent ( 50 )

Apparently, Americans donate much more money than Sri Langkans in amount BUT

Sri Langkans don't even have enough money for food but they still donate.

Who is more generous?

Did you read anterian's post above?

Might I suggest that the lesson of the widow's mite should be factored into any act of charity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow's_mite

I say this not as a Christian, I am not, but as an observer of the human condition

It discusses this very topic. Everything you posted about in this post has been discussed in more depth elsewhere in this thread. If you read the posts, you might find them interesting/enlightening.

[sparebox2]

Farang may be rich, but not as generous.

Thai people may be poor, but in time of crisis, we share however little we have got.

Also, the Thai king generousity is well know world wide. He have give so much to the Thai people, the amount far exceed everyone else put together.

Long live the king.

[xthAi76s]

Farang may be rich, but not as generous.

Thai people may be poor, but in time of crisis, we share however little we have got.

Also, the Thai king generousity is well know world wide. He have give so much to the Thai people, the amount far exceed everyone else put together.

Long live the king.

Thanks for the propaganda.

With respect, how much have Thais given to countries outside of Thailand? How much does Thailand invest in Europe? Japan? China? America? Australia? Find me a link with some information about this, please. Certainly other countries (many of them Western/'Farang') have invested a great amount in Thailand, right? So, what do you mean by Farang may be rich, but not as generous?

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have given away more money to charity than anyone. These are both Westerners, (I mean, they are 'Farang') and, more specifically, Americans.

Anyway, are you Thai? Where did you goto school? It would be interesting to have a Thai perspective on this, but you should support your feelings with more information.

Thanks

[hehehoho]

Farang may be rich, but not as generous.

Thai people may be poor, but in time of crisis, we share however little we have got.

Also, the Thai king generousity is well know world wide. He have give so much to the Thai people, the amount far exceed everyone else put together.

Long live the king.

Though in a ratio of personal wealth to cash donated I'm not so sure the charts would be the same.