Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Can private charity replace the social safety net?
Can private charity replace the social safety net?
Jan 8, 2026 1:02 PM

After Black Friday, Small Business Saturday, and Cyber es Giving Tuesday. The Tuesday following Thanksgiving has e the unofficial launch of the charitable season, when many people around the globe focus on their holiday and end-of-year giving.

The outpouring of generosity during the giving season raises the question of why all charity can’t be funded privately. Do we even need agovernment social safety net anymore?

Before we can answer that question we must first determine the replacement cost of the safety net. What percent of federal budget goes to programs that provide aid (other than health insurance or Social Security benefits) to individuals and families facing hardship? Forty percent? Thirty percent? Twenty percent?

The actual answer is9 percent, or $366 billion.

Could the amount of money donated to private charities cover the substitution cost for the social safety net? The short answer is: it’s not even close. As Arthur C. Brooks explains,

It would be wonderful if America could solve all problems of poverty and need through private charity. We can and should give even more, and conservatives must continue to lead by example. But even in this remarkably charitable country—where voluntary giving alone exceeds the total GDP of nations such as Israel and Chile—private donations cannot guarantee anywhere near the level of assistance that vast majorities of Americans across the political spectrum believe is our moral duty.

Consider the present total that Americans give annually to human-service organizations that assist the vulnerable. es to about $40 billion, according to Giving USA. Now suppose that we could spread that sum across the 48 million Americans receiving food assistance, with zero overhead plete effectiveness. It e to just $847 per person per year.

Or take the incredible donation levels that followed Hurricane Katrina in 2011. The outpouring of contributions exceeded $3 billion, a record-setting figure that topped even the response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. But even this historic episode raised enough to offset only 3 percent of the costs the storm imposed on the devastated areas of Louisiana and Mississippi. Voluntary charity simply cannot get the job done on its own.

In 2017, an estimated $274 million was raised online in the U.S. during the sixth annualGiving Tuesday. To cover just the cost of the safety net provided by the federal government ($366 billion) we’d need to raise 3.5 times more than was donated on Giving Tuesday every single day throughout the entire year.

The unfortunate reality is that Americans donate to private charity less than 10 percent of the amount provided by the government’s social safety net. But let’s assume that state-based welfare is rife with fraud and abuse and that after reforms we could cut the amount spent in half. Even then private charity would only cover 20 percent of the original amount needed.

Some people might argue that charity would be funded if thegovernment wasn’t already taking the money from citizens. But last year Americans were given a tax cut equal to about $550 billion a year. That’s more than enough to pay for the safety net ($366 billion) and still have half a billion dollars in leftover tax cuts for every man, woman, and child in America. Yet we are not expected to see $366 billion in directed charitable giving to alleviating poverty.

There are a lot of conservatives (including me) who think our neighbors in need would be better off if most or all of the safety net was funded by charity. But the sobering reality is that we have a long, long way to go before that is even in the realm of possibility. Americans only currently give bined total of $390 billion a year—and that’s for every form of charity (churches, education, non-profits, animal shelters, arts programs, etc.).

If we are going to convince our fellow Americans that government should get out of the welfare business, we need to figure out a way to close the charity gap and show the private sector truly can take care of the poor and needy.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
10 things political scientists know that we don’t
“If economics is the dismal science,” says Hans Noel, an associate professor at Georgetown University, “then political science is the dismissed science.” Most Americans—from pundits to voters—don’t think that political science has much to say about political life. But there are some things, notes Noel, that “political scientists know that it seems many practitioners, pundits, journalists, and otherwise informed citizens do not.” Here are excerpts from Noel’s list of ten things political scientists know that you don’t: #1. It’s The...
Introduction to the ‘Principles Project’
A young professor panies his mentor to a private meeting of economists from around the country. As they take their seats the host says, “To start us off, let’s have a few rounds of the best jokes.” An elderly woman stands up and says “37,” and everyone laughs. Another yells “49,” and the crowd cackles hysterically. This goes on for a while, when the young man turns to his senior and says, “I don’t get it, numbers aren’t funny.” His...
The bright side of the trade war with China?
“This year marks the 40th anniversary of one of the most consequential anti-poverty programs in human history,” says Rev. Ben Johnson in this week’s Acton Commentary. “Now, there is evidence that its spillover effects may lift millions more out of dire need.” The new openness to enterprise, private property, and investment led to China’s meteoric economic rise. Now, Donald Trump’s tariffs are encouraging manufacturers to take their factories elsewhere. Ian Chen, CEO of a Chinese technological exporter, said that Trump’s...
Radio Free Acton: Econ Quiz on pensions and public debt; Upstream on Frida Kahlo and Stalinism
On this episode of Radio Free Acton, host Caroline Roberts speaks with Dave Hebert, Professor of Economics at Aquinas College for another Econ Quiz segment on the topic of pensions and state debt. Then, on the Upstream segment, Bruce Edward Walker talks to Phil Terzian, a writer for The Weekly Standard, on the blind spots in the legacy of Frida Kahlo as well as our modern understanding of Stalinism. Check out these additional resources on this week’s podcast topics: Read...
Income inequality and the ‘Groupon Theory of Morality’
For many years I was unable to understand the reasoning behind the claims that e inequality is a moral issue that only applies at the group level. Then it came to me like an epiphany—or more accurately, as a Groupon email. According to Wikipedia, the Groupon works as an assurance contract: If a certain number of people sign up for an offer, then the deal es available to all; if the predetermined minimum is not met, no one gets the...
James V. Schall on Islam and the West
Pope Benedict XVI made an fortable claim in his 2006 Regensburg address: contemporary Muslim terrorism may owe something to Islam’s conception of God. A year later, Father James V. Schall SJ wrote a book about the address which, as Acton Director of Research Samuel Gregg says, placed it in the wider context of a set of religious and philosophical challenges that many Westerners still can’t bring themselves to address: Over the past sixteen years, Schall has written numerous articles on...
Would Jesus take an Uber?
New York City has enacted the first-ever government cap on the number of vehicles licensed to ride-sharing services like Uber or Lyft. On Tuesday, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed the bill imposing a one-year moratorium on new licenses, establishing a minimum wage for drivers – and touching off an international debate among Christians and others about the morality of Uber. “As the council was considering the legislation, some in my church circles discussed avoiding ride-sharing as a way to love...
What do stock markets do?
Note: This is post #89 in a weekly video series on basic economics. pany can raise money and create new investment by selling shares through an initial public offering (IPO). When you buy pany’s shares on the stock market, though, no new investment is created. So what exactly do stock markets do? In this video by Marginal Revolution University,Alex Tabarrok explains how stock markets serve as a financial intermediary and serves as a key institution encouraging new businesses. (If you...
Sen. Elizabeth Warren brings government muscle to corporate ‘accountability’
It was in Godfather III where Al Pacino as Michael Corleone said it first and said it best: “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” Before we were able to put away our party hats after celebrating the Supreme Court’s Janus decision in June, Missouri rejected a right-to-work measure at the state’s primary ballot box last week. And now Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) wants to do a federally legislated end run around Janus with a...
The Parable of the Long Spoons explains free markets
“How can we explain this emporiophobia—a fear of markets—given the overwhelming evidence that such institutions provide the greatest wealth, health and happiness for humankind?” When economics professor Paul Rubin asked that questionhe answered by saying that we need to shift the metaphor of markets from petition” to “cooperation.” Cooperation isn’t just more important in the economic sphere—it’s also mon. We cooperate with everyone involved in making all the products we buy and sell, millions of people we’ll never know. […]...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved