GOING PUBLIC . . . ABOUT MONEY!

Uncategorized

Peter Singer is still hiding out in my psyche! I can’t get his essay “On Giving,” his recently published book, “The Life You Can Save” and his public lecture, which I heard from a first row seat where I could not escape the cross-hairs of his probing and penetrating logic, out of my mind. He’s won the argument that our family budget is a moral document, that how we spend our money poses an ethical agenda. He’s inspired animated and at times awkward conversations between my wife and me. Now this is not something new to us. For four decades we have struggled, as people of faith, to clarify our values and principles, and to be as faithful as we are able in manifesting those values and principles in how we live – including our financial management.

This morning, re-visiting scribbled notes from that lecture, my eyes fell on a website he’d named – BolderGiving.com – and next that a reminder of Singer’s insistence that, in this matter of the morality of giving, we need to “go public” in telling our story, especially when it chronicles a process where commitment to giving becomes more and more generous. “That would be boastful and pride-full, arrogant and ego-driven,” a voice in my head argued. A visit to that website only deepened my dilemma: simple stories, most by “everyday folks,” though some by names you’d recognize, sharing their journeys toward extraordinary giving.

So, briefly for now, a first hesitant, halting, significantly embarrassed first shot at “going public.” Betsy and I both came from families, our parents raised by depression-era parents, who “lived beneath their means.” I began tithing in childhood, being from a tithing family – 10 cents of my $1 allowance tucked weekly into my offering envelope. We moved to eastern Long Island at age 25, where I served my first church as a pastor. Two years later the U.S. Air Force hired me as a part-time auxiliary chaplain at a remote radar station for $50 a week. Viewing it as “found money,” we decided to add it to our tithe, so, rather painlessly, we moved to a double tithe. When we were in our mid-forties, we went on a mission trip to Haiti, the poorest country in our hemisphere, face-to-face with devastating poverty. As a family (one of our sons had gone with us), we decided to sell our summer home and give the proceeds to charity. We established a 501(c) 3 charitable foundation to process the money, $85,000 in all, with a commitment to give it all away within five years.

A year ago we made what seemed a “next step” decision. We decided to give away $50,000/year over the next ten years. Recently, as we prepared our income tax return, we discovered that we’d gotten “carried away” in 2008 and given away $75,000 – 75% of our combined, all-sources income of $100,000, or, 13% of our principle, whichever approach we take. Here’s the best part: (a) nothing has brought us more joy this past year than steering that $75,000 toward carefully chosen projects! That 501(c)3 entity I mentioned has established several poverty-focused, empowerment-oriented, grassroots-based projects mostly in Mexico, where our son, the one who went years ago to Haiti, lives and does mission work, and (b) across our lifetime, we have been, typically, “more than a bit anxious” about money and our financial future. This “$50,000 a year giving plan” arguably creates “something to be anxious about,” increasing financial vulnerability, one could argue. Yet any and all anxiety about money has disappeared!

I’m fighting a temptation to click “all” and then “delete.” Except, if someone were to tell me they had a strategy that would significantly increase happiness and well-being and eliminate anxiety about money – then hesitated as some shyness intruded – I’d urge them vigorously to speak up. So, I have done so.

6 Comments

6 Responses

  1. D. Ranck says:

    First, Howard, I had to ingest several Rolaids, as the mere mention of money turns my belly into a bubbly cauldron. Financial anxiety is to us what acne is to teenagers. It scars us, it embarasses us, it brings us to the mirror searching, gazing, pinching.

    I have no solution to it. For which reason I try not to make it a priority toward satisfaction. It is after all a tool and a means to get other hands into and effecting a (profound) need; for when our hands or tools at hand don’t seem sufficent to the task. If this be true, then perhaps one solution is stronger hands? Better tools in the shed?

    Being generous is just one of the most satisfactory experiences. I don’t think we should measure it by amount; but rather by sincerity. Howard, you certainly are a generous person and I think it’s admirable that you have set the financial contribution bar so high. But don’t feel bad about saving some for your own needs or changing expenses. Your most important contributions in my mind are interpersonal; and I speak from experience.

  2. Peter Singer says:

    Howard, I’m so glad you did go public. That’s an inspiring example. You are joining others who have gone public through boldergiving.org or in other ways, and I am sure that it will all help to change the culture of giving.

  3. Amy Pearl says:

    So, speaking of money, giving it away, and being generous…our nonprofit organization has just launched something called changexchange (thechangexchange.org). Its goal is to enable average folks to “invest their share” in very early stage social innovotors. The return on the investment is social profit, which we provide updates on progress and impact through (Twitter) and other social media and news. It’s pretty cool!

    We teach a community-based program called Local Agenda that results in people launching a social venture. Part-time waitresses, ex-CEOs, moms, and Baby Boomers alike sign up for the 16 weeks, simply because they want to do something good with their lives. Some have an idea, some don’t. They just want to make a difference.

    They soon exceed their own expectations about what they might do with their lives. Which brought us to build changexchange. People helping people. The catch is, we won’t list anyone on changexchange unless they have a sustaining strategy to allow them be self-sustaining and not rely on grants and charity only. So, back to money. The need for a handout (investment money) is short-term, so giving is a way to get someone started.

    This is very early, but given the two of you and your work in this area, I’d love to hear your thoughts!

  4. Tinny says:

    Hi Howard,

    I was directed here by Peter Singer’s Twitter update. I think lots of people will be too.
    I think this is wonderful and I’m so glad you swallowed your shyness and published your story.
    I’ve pledged on http://www.thelifeyoucansave.com and made one modest donation so far but have been sifting through other projects, narrowing it down to a few favoruites to decide who else to help…but your blog entry makes me think ‘why don’t I just give to all of them?!’ Why not?! I love that you just put a chunk of money aside and I think that’s what our family can do too.

    Thank you for your inspiration.
    Tinny

  5. Matthai Kuruvila says:

    This is the second time I’ve read this post, the first being when you announced your blog in April and, again, tonight.

    Perhaps oddly, I find myself drawn to the tension between the first commenter, D. Ranck, and your post, Howard. Yours, Howard, talks about money as a moral issue. Ranck’s post speaks of money as an emotional issue. And I think that’s an important distinction, one not bridged by your initial post.

    Money is a toxic and taboo topic, in no small part, because of all the emotional layers put upon it. Money destroys marriages and tears friendships apart. How a father and mother spoke about money shapes a child, for better and for worse. Folks use it to make themselves happy and solve emotional issues. Money is just a system of barter, but we give it emotional meaning that it isn’t due. That’s unhealthy. So I think the process of coming to a healthy relationship with money comes through understanding one’s own “money autobiography,” so to speak.

    I don’t think folks could come to the point of giving money away in the way you describe merely by deciding it to be so. I think your giving is courageous and bold. But I think, for others, such as someone who’s gotten into a pattern of unhealthy debt, it may be just as courageous to save.

    My personal thought is that a healthy relationship with money would include both giving and saving. That is, that money becomes fluid, going in and out of your life — and not necessarily just in one direction.

    (here’s the piece I wrote earlier this year: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/03/02/MNNJ164GU8.DTL)

  6. Howard says:

    Dear Matthai,

    What a lovely way to (re)connect. And thank you for giving this post such a careful and reflective reading. I will pass it on to Dick Ranck, who raised the question about the emotional side of relating to money.

    I want to both agree with, and, “push back” against your reply. The agreement is wholehearted. Betsy and I have worked for years with a ministry at Church of the Savior in D.C. called Ministry of Money, having led workshops under their sponsorship around the country and travel seminars to Haiti and India. Participants write “money autobiographies” to unmask childhood memories relating to money that were so imprinting, thus impacting adult attitudes and behavior, both consciously and unconsciously, and thereby impacting relationships, especially husband and wife. We have wrestled with our own family legacies vis-a-vis money. There is a powerful emotional component.

    But, much influenced by Peter Singer (see subsequent posts directly relating to Singer, and more recent ones about introducing giving to our grandchildren and guarding against reporting about our adult sons in unduly monetary terms), it has seemed important to address the “moral imperative” relative to money independently. Two or three years ago we monitored and logged every single expense for a year, down to the nickel. Each year we craft an expense-side budget, which we view as a “moral document.” We use what some call “reverse tithe” giving away what we do not spend — thus the 50% (in 2008, 75%) giving percentage. Yes, coming to that decision meant “facing through” emotional issues. Yes, it took a bit of courage. But we view it, above all, in moral terms.

    I’ll welcome your response. Of course, the emotional side of money matters is foundational, unavoidable and difficult. But, I would argue, the moral side must “stand on its own right.” I do not want my emotional struggle to excuse a use of money that facilitates unnecessary death of even one of the human family’s children. Yes, I mean to be that direct!

    Trust you are well . . . we are,

    Howard

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>