设万维读者为首页 万维读者网 -- 全球华人的精神家园 广告服务 联系我们 关于万维
 
首  页 新  闻 视  频 博  客 论  坛 分类广告 购  物
搜索>> 发表日志 控制面板 个人相册 给我留言
帮助 退出
汪 翔  
陪人工智能一起傻  
https://blog.creaders.net/u/3000/ > 复制 > 收藏本页
网络日志正文
不学不行:美国独特的捐赠文化 2012-08-24 07:04:18

美国独特的捐赠文化

德和才,哪一个更为重要?如果你只能选择其一,你会放弃哪位?无论你嘴上怎么样唱高调,中国目前的现实,就是在打造一代代的无德,或许有时候倒是有点才的“精英”。有才无德只能是小人,这样的人为主体的国度,当然是不可能玩转团队合作这盘大棋的。这,可能就是中国人一直缺乏团队合作意识的根本所在吧。

在这里,有一个更为重要的问题是:怎么样才能够打造德?怎么样才能够实现修身养性?难道靠的就是一个个伟大的口号?孙中山做了,毛泽东也做了,效果呢?他们自己到底又做的怎么样呢?回答这样的问题,历史自会给出良好的答案。

 

在美国,有一种看不见但却非常实在的捐赠文明存在。我觉得,就是这种文明和文化,在潜移默化,无形之中,时时刻刻的,熏陶我们的灵魂,造就我们境界的清新。而这样的捐赠文化和传统,在中国历史上好像就从来都没有出现过,也不太可能在可预见的未来出现。

远的已经失忆,就谈最近几个月的事情。每个星期,都会有陌生人打来电话,语气客气、优雅,目的也非常明确:你能不能为我们的退伍老兵,或者红十字会什么的慈善机构,捐赠点你不怎么用的衣物?

有几次,我都和对方开玩笑:你们天天来要,我再多的存货也会耗尽。

你这样说的时候,对方的老太太会更为客气的回答说:对不起,我能够理解。那还是下次再试吧。

在这种时候,我是没有办法拒接给予的。长此以往的结果,当然就是让大量的零售店得益:因为,我们会不得不为了捐赠衣物而添置新衣物。能够做到这点,也还是得益于大量中国人的牺牲,是他们的牺牲,让我们能够在美国花很低的价钱去旧换新,因此,也才有可以捐赠的货物。

很多时候,我们干脆就将不怎么爱穿的,不管是新的(许多连标签都还在)还是旧的,都来个“顺水推舟”,送了人情。走到今天这样的习惯,还是我们家老婆长期以来的言传身教的结果。在过去很多年,只是她一个人在“打点”自己和孩子的衣物。最近,却是轮到我了。也因此,我获得了大量的空间可以被用在更需要的方面。仔细想想,每个星期好几次的好几大包给予,一年下来,确实也是很巨大的数量。

 

有时候,想想这许多质量不错的衣服,再想想还有那么多的中国同胞,很可能一辈子都没有机会享受这种质量的中国产品,内心能够有的,除了对美国捐赠文化的敬意之外,也只能是一份内心深处的悲凉而已。想想几个月之前,为了捐出几万元价值的书籍购买款(是实实在在的票子,就是因为限定了只能购买书籍,对方就缺少兴趣!再者,可能就是嫌数目太小?!),走了一大圈,最终反倒感觉自己就是一个乞丐?!

 

美国的捐赠文化涉及的范围非常的广:工作的人,有在薪水里面捐赠,并且获得来自公司支持的(Match);交税的时候,还有一个小框问你是不是乐意付出区区一美元的?即使你上店里面买东西,有的地方还会问你,是不是乐意将零钱捐出去?

在美国,最普及和最常规的部分,最大的捐赠,除了来自薪水直接扣除的外,恐怕就是大量普通人,在各个教堂进行的“尽力而为”的捐赠了。

有意思的是,美国佬有时候还会请客:让你和他们一起上他们的教堂,在那里的属于你的那份捐款的代付,就是他们给你的“请客”部分。我就这样被善待了几次,不过,我还是入乡随俗,来个AA制,好让自己心安理得。对于我,感觉比实在更为实在。

为了政治而提供的捐款,就是目前这样的时刻最叫响的部分了。那几位总统候选人高达几亿、几十亿的竞选资金,也是来自各种不同的捐赠。

在这个世界上,只要有付出和接受,就有交换利益的空间存在。为此,美国制定了非常严格和相对合理的制约法律,让利益交换的可能性变的最小。中国数千年下来的腐败,实际上也是某种程度的“捐赠”下利益交换的结果。不同的,只是有些部分被过度的放大了而已。而能够做到这点的,也还是因为权力的不平衡,和法律制约力的微小。而后者又是“得益于”前者的存在而存在的。

不管形式如何,在美国所发生的捐赠,一切的一切都是你的自愿。没有人会让你感觉伟大,也没有人会让你感觉难堪和低贱?!反过来,你去看看中国国内的情况:你在公交车上不让座位(实际上也是一种捐赠——使用权的捐赠),你不仅会受到声讨和人肉追剿,还可能被人重重的扇下好几个耳光。为此受虐,你还没有反击的权利。在那里的一切,都是被迫的,那样的捐赠文明,和抢劫到底有多大的区别?我是看不出的。

下面这篇文章,谈的是关于美国捐赠的统计数据。对于我们理解美国的这部分文化,有很大的启发价值。

记住了,在美国生活,你还真的得慷慨点。如果你老是抠门,老是想着到处占便宜,算计他人,我看不出,你怎样能够融入美国文明,也不能想象出,你怎样能够融入美国主流。很多人谈论融入主流,看的只是自己“成就”方面的“业绩”,也就是你在这个生活所获得的部分(索取),却忽视了更为重要的付出和给予。你存在的价值,最重要的还是你的给予,你对他人的价值!

中国人和中国同胞,在谈论融入主流时,别再自以为是,别再那么功利性极重,别再那么以小人之心,度君子之腹了。仔细的深入美国的文明,仔细地看看,普通美国人的真实活法,然后,再开你那“高贵”的尊口吧?!否则,也只能是自己作践自己。

 

 你所不知的美国“微职业”

 

America’s Most (and Least) Generous States

August 22, 2012

 

A report released on charitable giving this week shows that the residents of some states appear to be far more generous than others. The average Utah household earning more than $50,000 a year gave more than 10% of its disposable income, while similarly situated New Hampshire residents gave less than 3% of their income. Based on The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s latest data, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the most and least generous states in the country.

The states that give the most appear to have more residents in need. Seven of the 10 most charitable states also have among the 10-highest proportions of families living below the poverty level. In Mississippi, where the median charitable donation was 7.2% of discretionary income — the second-highest in the country — nearly 20% of families live below the poverty line, the nation’s highest rate.

The presence of very high-income households appeared to reduce the percent of discretionary income residents gave. Only one of the 20 states with the largest proportion of residents earning $200,000 or more were among the 10 most generous states. This makes sense, explained Peter Panepento, assistant managing editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy, in an interview with 24/7 Wall St. He explained that “Those who are at the higher income levels give more money, but they tend to give at a lower percentage of their income because their incomes are so much higher.”

However, the wealthy are more likely to make charitable donations when exposed to poverty. According to an earlier study conducted by The Chronicle of Philanthropy, households that earned more than $200,000 a year gave on average 4.2% of their median discretionary income. But when those wealthy households lived in highly concentrated areas of wealthy people, where more than 40% of the zipcode earned more than $200,000 a year, they gave only 2.8%. “So,” Panepento explained, “there’s some thought that the more you’re exposed to the needs of your community, the more compelled you are to give.”

The presence of religion appeared to have the strongest relationship to charitable donations. Of the 10 states that gave the most, eight were among the 10 states with the highest percentage of residents reporting going to church, synagogue, or mosque on a weekly basis, based on a Gallup survey. The reverse was true of the least charitable states. New Hampshire, the state that gave the least, also had the lowest percentage of residents reporting attending religious services. Panepento explained that this “was particularly the case in Utah, where the Mormon church is a major force, and where tithing is a big part of that state’s culture.”

The Chronicle of Philanthropy measured charitable giving by households that earned more than $50,000 in 2008. The group calculated how much discretionary income those households had, based on income, taxes and the cost of living in the state. They then compared discretionary income to the median charitable donation, to determine how much residents donated relative to how much they could afford. In addition to these data, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed median household income, the percent of families living below the poverty line and the percent of households earning more than $200,000 from the U.S. Census Bureau. We relied on a 2009 Gallup survey for the percent of residents in each state that attended a religious service on a weekly basis. The percentage of 2010 tax filers who reported a charitable donation was obtained from the Internal Revenue Service.

These are America’s Most (and Least) Generous States

America’s 10 Most Generous States

10. Maryland
> Pct. of income donated: 5.7%
> Total charitable contributions: $3.9 billion (11th highest)
> Median contribution: $2,969 (13th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 9.7% (3rd highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 6.6% (2nd lowest)

Maryland’s median household income of $68,854 is the highest in the U.S., and the percentage of households making more than $200,000 a year, at 9.7%, is the third highest in the country. While Maryland is the only state on this list with a median contribution below $3,000, it may be because residents spend more than most on taxes. Marylanders pay $5,217.64 per capita in state and local taxes, the fifth highest in the U.S. and the highest on this list by a hefty $1,634.92.

9. North Carolina
> Pct. of income donated: 5.9%
> Total charitable contributions: $4.3 billion (9th highest)
> Median contribution: $3,132 (11th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.6% (24th highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 13.3% (11th highest)

North Carolina may have one of highest unemployment rates in the country at 9.6%, but residents of this state are still some of the most generous in the country. The giving is also relatively consistent throughout the population with 28.9% of tax returns filing for charitable donations — the 15th-highest percentage in the country. Like many of the most generous states, North Carolina has a church attendance that is also among the highest in the country. 53% of North Carolinians reported going to church, synagogue or mosque at least once a week compared to the 41.6% national average. Three of the most generous cities in the U.S. reporting the most donations per 1,000 people also happen to be located in the Tar Heel state: Cary, Raleigh, and Durham.

8. Georgia
> Pct. of income donated: 6.2%
> Total charitable contributions: $4.8 billion (6th highest)
> Median contribution: $3,396 (7th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 4.2% (19th highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 13.7% (9th highest)

Georgia has among the highest percent of families living below the poverty line and the fifth-highest unemployment rate. The giving in this state is fairly consistent across the population — Georgia ranks 12th for the percentage of tax returns filed with charitable donations listed at 29.7%. Georgia is a fairly religious state — 51% of residents report going to church, synagogue or mosque at least once a week, among the highest in the country.

7. Arkansas
> Pct. of income donated: 6.3%
> Total charitable contributions: $1 billion (18th lowest)
> Median contribution: $3,554 (5th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 2.3% (3rd lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 14.1% (6th highest)

Like many of the most generous states, Arkansas is one of the poorer states in the country. The median household income is the third lowest in the country at $38,307, and the percentage of households with a median income over $200,000 is less than half the national average of 5.1%. While the percentage of discretionary income donated was one of the highest in the country, Arkansas had the seventh-lowest percentage of tax returns filed with charitable donations listed. The amount, 19.2%, is less than half the amount of Maryland, the state with the highest percentage of tax returns listing charitable donations, although Marylanders gave less as a percent of their discretionary income.

6. Idaho
> Pct. of income donated: 6.4% (tied-fifth)
> Total charitable contributions: $639 million (14th lowest)
> Median contribution: $3,155 (10th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 2.3% (4th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 11.6% (19th highest)

Idaho ties with South Carolina for being the fifth most generous state in the nation. According to a 2006 study by Philanthropy Northwest, 69% of all charitable donations in Idaho went towards education related charities. This is an appropriate focus for a state that had the second lowest spending per a pupil at $7,106. The national average for pupil spending was $10,615. Residents may think they have more to donate because Idaho is a downright cheap place to live. The cost of living index for Idaho is the sixth lowest in U.S.

5. South Carolina
> Pct. of income donated: 6.4% (tied-fifth)
> Total charitable contributions: $2 billion (25th highest)
> Median contribution: $3,429 (6th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 2.9% (11th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 13.8% (8th highest)

South Carolina is a state buffeted by economic problems. The state’s 9.6% unemployment rate is tied for fifth highest in the U.S. and well above the national rate of 8.3%. The state also has among the highest percentage of residents on food stamps (14.5%) and families living below the poverty line (13.8%). Nevertheless, 25.8% of South Carolina residents filed tax returns with charitable contributions, collectively giving 6.4% of their discretionary income. Like many generous states, South Carolina is deeply religious, with 56% of the population going to church, synagogue or mosque at least once a week, the fourth highest proportion in the U.S.

4. Tennessee
> Pct. of income donated: 6.6%
> Total charitable contributions: $2.7 billion (16th highest)
> Median contribution: $3,807 (4th highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.4% (22nd lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 13.4% (10th highest)

Unlike states such as South Carolina and Georgia, where more than a quarter of the people filed for charitable contribution deductions, less than one in five of Tennesseans filed taxes with a contribution. Nevertheless, those who did donate gave a median contribution of $3,807, the fourth highest of all states. Low taxes and low cost of living may be encouraging some Tennesseans to donate. The 7.6% state and local tax burden is the fourth-lowest in the country. Meanwhile, the state also has the lowest overall cost of living and the lowest cost of living for housing.

3. Alabama
> Pct. of income donated: 7.1%
> Total charitable contributions: $2.3 billion (21st highest)
> Median contribution: $4,007 (2nd highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 2.9% (12th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 14.7% (3rd highest)

Alabama is a deeply religious state, with 58% of the population going to church, synagogue or mosque at least once a week, which is highly indicative of a giving culture. A quarter of the people in the state filed tax returns with charitable contributions, and the median contribution was $4,007 — the only state except for Utah with a median contribution above $4,000. But since the Chronicle of Philanthropy survey only measured donations for households who make more than $50,000, it may have missed many people in Alabama who don’t make nearly enough to qualify for this measurement. Most notably, 14.7% of families live below the poverty line, the third highest rate among all states.

2. Mississippi
> Pct. of income donated: 7.2%
> Total charitable contributions: $1.1 billion (19th lowest)
> Median contribution: $3,998 (3rd highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 2.1% (2nd lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 17.8% (the highest)

Mississippi has the lowest median income in the country at $36,851 and highest percentage of families living below the poverty line at 17.8%. But that doesn’t keep the residents from being generous with what they do have. Religion likely influences how residents donate. Mississippians are avid church-goers — 63% of residents went to church, synagogue or mosque once a week, the highest percentage in the country.

1. Utah
> Pct. of income donated: 10.6%
> Total charitable contributions: $2.4 billion (20th highest)
> Median contribution: $5,225 (the highest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.5% (24th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 9.7% (24th lowest)

Utah isn’t by any means the richest state in the U.S. The median income of $54,744 is right around the national median of $50,046. Nevertheless, Utahns donated 10.6% of their discretionary income to charity — the highest rate of any state by sizable 3.4 percentage points. Also, more than a third (33.4%) of the population claimed a charitable contribution on their taxes. High amounts of charitable giving is a product of the fact that a majority of Utahns are Mormon - more than 62% of Utah’s population is affiliated with the Mormon Church, according to The Salt Lake Tribune. Funded by tithing, the church asks members to give 10% of their income “to move forward the work of the church.”

America’s 10 Least Generous States

10. Nevada
> Pct. of income donated: 3.9%
> Total charitable contributions: $952 million (16th lowest)
> Median contribution: $1,978 (9th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.7% (23rd highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 11.1% (21st highest)

Nevadans are lightly taxed, paying just 7.5% of their income in state and local taxes — the second-smallest tax burden in the U.S. Still, residents of the state were among the worst givers in the country, as the state’s median contribution was less than $2,000. One issue that may contribute to this low figure is religion. Just 30% of Nevadans were regularly involved in religious services, the lowest proportion in the nation outside New England.

9. New Jersey
> Pct. of income donated: 3.7%
> Total charitable contributions: $4.5 billion (8th highest)
> Median contribution: $2,181 (14th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 10.6% (the highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 7.8% (10th lowest)

New Jersey residents like to donate, with 36.6% filing tax returns claiming a deduction for charitable contributions. However, donations remain modest. At only 3.7% of discretionary income, charitable donations as a percentage of discretionary income are far lower than most states. In fairness, New Jerseyans have it hard, faced with a collective 12.2% state and local tax burden, the highest in the country. While the state is not the most religious in the country, it’s pious compared to much of the Northeast. 38% of New Jersey residents attended church, synagogue or mosque at least once a week, compared to less than one-third of residents in Rhode Island (32%), Connecticut (32%), Massachusetts (30%), Vermont (23%), Maine (27%) and New Hampshire (26%).

8. North Dakota
> Pct. of income donated: 3.5%
> Total charitable contributions: $164 million (the lowest)
> Median contribution: $2,257 (17th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.1% (13th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 7.8% (9th lowest)

North Dakota’s total charitable contributions by households earning over $50,000 a year was the absolute smallest, at $164 million. In addition to the state’s modest population, relatively few residents listed a charitable deduction on their tax returns — at 14.7%, it was second-lowest proportion in the country. Though the state’s median income was slightly below the national median, North Dakotans are not especially poor. Just 7.8% of families lived below the poverty line, among the lowest percentage in the U.S., while 8.2% of households required food stamps, below the 11.9% national average. Additionally, North Dakota’s July unemployment rate was just 3%, well under the national rate of 8.3% and the lowest in the country.

7. Wisconsin
> Pct. of income donated: 3.4%
> Total charitable contributions: $2 billion (25th lowest)
> Median contribution: $1,747 (6th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.3% (17th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 9.1% (17th lowest)

Wisconsin is one of just two Midwestern states that are on the list of the least generous states in the country. Maybe this lack of propensity for giving is due to an above average tax burden on individuals in the Badger state. The average state and local tax burden of 11% in Wisconsin is the fourth highest in the country. Or, maybe it has something to do with the above average equality in the state as compared to the rest of the country. The one-year Gini coefficient for Wisconsin is the sixth lowest in the country, meaning that the divide between the rich and poor is relatively narrow.

6. Connecticut
> Pct. of income donated: 3.3%
> Total charitable contributions: $2.3 billion (22nd highest)
> Median contribution: $1,916 (7th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 10.3% (2nd highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 7.2% (5th lowest)

Connecticut is among the wealthiest states in the country. Median income was $64,032, compared to the national median income of $50,046, and 10.3% of households earned over $200,000 a year, the second-highest proportion among all states in the U.S. Despite this wealth, the median contribution to charity by those earning over $50,000 was just $1,916 per year — the seventh-lowest figure nationally. Residents may be deterred from giving to charity by a higher tax burden, as 12% of income went to state and local taxes, the third-highest nationally. Connecticut also had the fourth-highest cost of living in the U.S.

5. Rhode Island
> Pct. of income donated: 3.1%
> Total charitable contributions: $351 million (8th lowest)
> Median contribution: $1,666 (5th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 5.4% (13th highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 9.2% (20th lowest)

More than 30% of Rhode Islanders filed a charitable contribution on their income taxes. But of filers making $50,000 or more the median contribution was just $1,666, or 3.1% of discretionary income. The state continues to struggle with an economy that has been in decline for some time. The state’s 10.8% unemployment rate in July is the second-highest in the U.S. and well above the national rate of 8.3%. Rhode Island also has among the highest cost of living and the fifth-highest state and local tax burden, at 10.7%. Rhode Island’s 32% weekly rate attendance at churches, synagogues or mosques is higher than most of its New England peers, but about 20 percentage points below many of the most generous states.

4. Massachusetts
> Pct. of income donated: 2.8%
> Total charitable contributions: $3.1 billion (14th highest)
> Median contribution: $1,652 (4th lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 9% (4th highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 8.2% (13th lowest)

Massachusetts residents are hardly poor. The state’s $62,072 annual median income was more than $10,000 more than the national median. And just three states had a higher proportion of residents who earned over $200,000 a year than Massachusetts. Still, residents earning $50,000 or more gave just 2.8% of their discretionary income to charity. Limited religious participation may contribute to this, as just 29% of individuals surveyed by Gallup reported they frequently attended religious services. Another deterrent may be Massachusetts’ 10% state and local tax burden, which was one of the nation’s highest.

3. Vermont
> Pct. of income donated: 2.8%
> Total charitable contributions: $166 million (2nd lowest)
> Median contribution: $1,548 (3rd lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 3.9% (22nd highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 8.4% (14th lowest)

While the state’s median household income is just slightly lower than the national median, only 21.4% of the population filed for a charitable contribution on their taxes, one of the lowest percentage in the country. For those who did file and made more than $50,000, the median contribution was only $1,548, which is less than one-third of the median contribution of most generous state. While the state and local tax burden of 10.2% is the eighth highest in the U.S., religion could explain this discrepancy. Only 23% of the population reported going regularly to church, synagogue or mosque, the lowest of all 50 states.

2. Maine
> Pct. of income donated: 2.8%
> Total charitable contributions: $308 million (6th lowest)
> Median contribution: $1,403 (the lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 2.8% (7th lowest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 8.8% (15th lowest)

Among Mainers earning in excess of $50,000 a year, the median contribution to charity was just $1,403, the lowest figure nationally by nearly $100. Residents are not especially wealthy; the state’s median household income was only $45,815, well below the $50,046 national median. Additionally 16.2% of households received food stamps, the sixth-highest figure nationwide. Meanwhile, just 2.8% of households earned more than $200,000, far less than the 5.1% who did nationally. Despite these figures, Maine had a state and local tax burden of 10.1% of per capita income, a higher figure than wealthier states such as Massachusetts and Maryland.

1. New Hampshire
> Pct. of income donated: 2.5%
> Total charitable contributions: $409 million (11th lowest)
> Median contribution: $1,497 (2nd lowest)
> Pct. households $200,000+ income: 5.7% (12th highest)
> Pct. families in poverty: 5.3% (the lowest)

The percentage of residents filing for charitable contributions in New Hampshire, 26.7%, was much less than many other New England States such as Connecticut (36.3%), Massachusetts (32.5%) and Rhode Island (30.1%). Unlike many of the least generous states, New Hampshire residents can’t claim they pay higher taxes than most. The state and local tax burden of 8% was the seventh lowest in the U.S. In addition, while the state had the 10th highest cost of living, states such as Connecticut and New Jersey had higher costs of living while also giving more to charity. Like many states, the tie between charitable contribution and religion is apparent — only 26% of New Hampshire residents reported going to church, synagogue or mosque weekly, the second-lowest rate in the country.

Michael B. Sauter, Lisa Uible, Samuel Weigley and Alexander E. M. Hess

你所不知的美国“微职业”

浏览(4593) (0) 评论(11)
发表评论
文章评论
作者:Next 留言时间:2012-08-26 11:38:51
融入美国主流社会,从每件事做起,此文说的就是其中之一。
以西方文明全方位取代中国腐朽之恶习,是中国的唯一出路,是有幸在美欧生活的华人的康庄大道。此文作者的一系列文章我想就是这个目的。至于效果如何,则不要太有指望。记得小时候在中国时一次上辈人谈天,说某人很土,送到纽约呆二十年也变不了。现在看来确实如此。这里有相当一部人现在进了饭馆依然二眼一抹黑,菜单尤如天书。平时娱乐就是打麻将斗地主,美国的新闻从中文转道获得,这种人对你的文章自然本能地反感
回复 | 0
作者:汪翔 留言时间:2012-08-26 08:45:59
谢谢各位来访。

从为数不多的评论,已经能够看出不少的问题:很多人在谈论的捐赠是“自己不需要的”,“亲戚家的捐赠”,“为自己省事”。而很少说是“自己所做的”,是“自己想做和喜欢做的”。在心灵深处,你还是一个“XX人”。

如果说,捐赠的衣物都是自己不需要的,顺便处理掉,免得搞Yard Sale的话,那么, 你还真的是“以小人之心度君子之腹”了。

我这里谈及的是自己在做的,而且是做了很长时间的,不是“他人,我认识的人”什么的“忽悠和神侃”。很多物件,我保留了很久,就是因为有价值。同时,我也相信,很多普通美国人有着和我同样的感觉和理解。

再者,也不要给我谈论什么“巨富”才是融入主流这样的无聊“理论”。
在美国生活,就是生活。别给我来那么多无聊的高调和政治。我这里对于忽悠的政治没有兴趣。对不起。

同时,也别在我这里高谈什么空洞的“爱国”和“爱党”。
那种无聊的话题,我已经几十年前就开始没有兴趣了。
谁喜欢忽悠和被忽悠、无聊和被无聊,谁就干去。
不是我,我也没有这样的兴趣、心情和闲工夫。

是的,我热爱美国这片热土,
我也热爱在美国的生活——
逍遥自在,其乐融融,
也不需要看任何人的眼色行事。
除此之外,我好像也没有什么样的奢求。

还是那句话,多想想贡献,多思量付出。
少谈论索取和贪婪、自利。
在你大度和培养德行之后,你的经济利益也会进入一个更高的层次。
回复 | 0
作者:yuan2 留言时间:2012-08-25 23:32:23
顶作者。好文。全美国每年的慈善捐献额度大约是3000亿美元,也就是人均1000美元。这也是一种文化,好的文化。美国的宗教影响比较大,这是好的宗教影响,包括施与受的关系和心理,包括关心弱势团体。非常多的人发达致富后,都有一颗感恩的心,感谢这个社会,感谢帮助过自己的人,非常自然的捐献。你在美国社会中会碰到更多的贫民老百姓(比较中国)真心的帮助别人,不要一点回报。

当然美国的制度也鼓励这些慈善付出,包括税收上的减扣。同时当然也会有一些人钻这个空子。

中国一些人在美国文化的熏陶影响下,也开始了回馈社会。在中国近代史上,美国对中国老百姓的影响十分巨大。我也相信,中国政府在这个方面也会像美国学习,修改税法,给与慈善捐献以一定的税收优惠。
回复 | 0
作者:alelightbeer2 留言时间:2012-08-25 20:07:02
忘了下面一条,
8.要想成为上流, 你必须富可敌国,奢华无度.
回复 | 0
作者:alelightbeer2 留言时间:2012-08-25 10:17:49
对不起,前面的发言有一些打字错误,更正如下.
捐赠不是文明,是一中文化.捐赠与高尚无关,有钱人捐赠,无钱人受捐,谁也不欠谁,谁也不比谁高尚.我们对社会的贡献最大的一部分就是我们的工作,不能把我们上班领工资仅仅看成是对社会的索取.“成就”和“业绩”本身也是一种衡量你对社会贡献大小的一种方法.另外,以后你在赞扬别人的时候,别再在顺带把自己的国家和人民给骂了.要知道你要捐赠是你自己的事,不管在哪儿都不会有人拦着你.至于要融入美国社会,不是靠捐赠就能融入的,如果你整天都在用你自己的语言,你永远都不可能融入.顺便告诉你一下,美国没有什么主流,只有上流,中流和下流一说.什么时候才能容入美国文化(上流,中流,下流 不管哪一流)呢? 当你达到以下情况的时后,可能就已经融入了;
1.做梦时讲出的话都是英语.
2.美国及西方的历史文化知识足以让你跟很多有知识的美国人大谈特谈几小时而不需要说PARDON ME. OR EXCUSE ME.
3.或者能跟美国下三烂的人开各种低级玩笑,OR BEHAVE EXACTLY LIKE THEM.
4.你80%的餐都是西方食品
5.你80%的朋友都是讲地道英语的老美.
6.你80%以上的思维活动方式都是老美的那一套
7.你最流利的语言是英语,汉语成了你的第二语
这时候你可能就已经融入美国文化了.否则捐再多的钱,你就是把你自己捐了,你还是你原来的你.
回复 | 0
作者:alelightbeer2 留言时间:2012-08-25 09:20:41
捐赠不是文明,是一中文化.捐赠与高尚无关,有钱人捐赠,无钱人受捐,谁也不欠谁,谁也不比谁高尚.我们对社会的贡献最大的一部分就是我们的工作,不能把我们上班领工资仅仅看成是对社会的索取.另外,以后你在赞扬别在顺带把自己的国家和人民给骂了.要知道你要捐赠是你自己的是,不管在哪儿都不会有人拦着你.至于要融入美国社会,不是捐赠就能融入,如果你怎天都在用你自己的语言,你永远都不可能融入.顺便告诉你一下,美国没有什么主流,只有上流和下流一说.
回复 | 0
作者:鄙视五分 留言时间:2012-08-24 19:27:36
到美国也不少日子了吧,怎么还这么幼稚。你最后那一段写的什么玩意儿,一副二鬼子的嘴脸,被文学城给踢出来了吧?怎么还不接受教训。
回复 | 0
作者:中西部人 留言时间:2012-08-24 19:00:08
大家应该知道美国的United way吧。华人上任第一天,赵小兰宣布自己的年薪为前任的一半,从39万美元减为19.5 万美元。她还下达指示,以后出差所有人一律坐普通经济舱。她本人平常也不坐公用车。中午午餐,赵小兰吃的是极为朴素的纸袋午餐。这不仅是为了节省开支,也是为了与挥霍无度的前任区别开来。
回复 | 0
作者:中西部人 留言时间:2012-08-24 18:48:26
汪翔你刚刚到美国的吧。对美国也太不了解了。捐赠是避税的手段。当年克林顿要竞选总统是他的税单被放到全国人民面前。他把旧的内裤计算5美元用来捐赠,这些都是减税的把戏啊。
回复 | 0
作者:西岸 留言时间:2012-08-24 13:42:41
这事情其实没有那么复杂和什么高尚多少的,看看第一段就能比较出来了,犹他州之所以排在第一是因为这是摩门教会要求教徒必须交出10%的收入作为会费的原因,犹他有75%的居民是摩门教徒。因此这是属于教会”强制“的,除非你不想在教会内被人看不起,当年在盐湖城参观摩门教总部的时候就发现了这个非常可恶的事情。
而对教会的捐钱可以作为对慈善组织的捐赠,因此可以免税,这就是为什么如今竞争总统的共和党候选人罗姆尼师傅的税率比各类税率里最低的15%的投资收益税还要低,只有14%不到的原因,因为交了10%的收入给摩门教会,尽了教徒的基本义务,还把给政府的税降了下来,反正这些钱不给摩门教也是给政府,而给教会既有名声又有实惠。
对于大宗捐款的人来讲都是通过计算税率的方式来决定捐款的数额,如今美国慈善组织整体接受的钱不够了,也是因为人们的收入因为经济危机而降低,捐款失去了降低税率的可能。
衣服或家具电器什么的,一般家庭都是通过捐助来扔掉,这比摆个yard sale要合适的多,省很多时间和精力。大宗东西人家上门来拿,省了运费。这些东西对你是没有什么用途,但救世军之类的可以卖给穷人,对救世军这类慈善机构是个收益,对穷人也是便宜。一般家里每年随便就会捐掉至少上百件衣服,尤其是有孩子的家庭,每次back to school,总要有不少可能就穿过一次的衣服”过时“。
美国的优点是任何事情都是发展成为一个生意,捐赠也是如此,许多非赢利组织是依靠这个活着的。因为所谓的非赢利,是指机构不是以盈利为目的,但并不是说其工作人员不挣钱,你捐助的不论是钱还是物中有百分之好几十是给这些人发工资和其他消费的,比如旅行,而真正用于慈善的比例可能不到10%,这是几年前电视专题的一个节目揭露的。这就是为什么经济危机开始后,美国开始出现大量的”非赢利组织“,任何一个个人都可以以什么高尚的名义来建立,比如帮助南美穷孩子上学,广告上说你只需平均每天捐27美分就可以帮助一个孩子。后来被揭露其用于孩子的钱只有5%左右,其他都被其组织挥霍(这个广告至今偶尔还能在电视上看到,因为并不违法)。
美国大概就是美国红十字会把overhead控制在10%左右,其他的慈善机构的overhead从40-95%的水平。
在商品社会里,商业化的东西是最可能持续的,这就是美国慈善事业的优势,本身是商业行为,但只要不以盈利为目的,政府也就不能收税(但其个人的收入是要打税的)。
这样你来看摩门教会要求教徒必须交10%的收入给教会就成了投资的性质,教会可以用这笔钱来影响政治(比如对加州8号公投仅一次就投入了两千五百万广告费,成为左右这个公投的主要原因),从而增大教会的影响。
就是通过事实上摩门教徒合法减税得到的钱来用于摩门教的私利,这种行为从道德角度是说不过去的,但合法。
至于那种付款时要求捐一块钱帮助什么治疗癌症的事情,如果你想拒绝的话,可以拒绝,这在美国是非常普遍的。但对于一些人来说,可能有面子上的原因而不好拒绝,比如排在你后面的人都看得见。这类现象也有过专门的研究,记得甚至有过官司,认为这种利用人们注重面子的心理而诱使捐款的方式不合法,后来也不了了之。
但你是可以堂而皇之拒绝的,这也是美国社会的好处,你的生活不是他人可以干涉的。人们对于这个方式募捐的一个抵触原因也是其募捐结果是不透明的,商店说是帮助治疗癌症基金,但你无法知道其overhead是多少,也许就是给自己发奖金了。就是并不在于我捐了多少钱,而是你怎么用这笔钱?
但总的来说,这种钱都是小钱,你买几十刀的东西并不在乎多付一块钱。捐款更多的时候是帮助自己的心理平衡,特别是救灾的名义,所谓救急不救穷的概念。
美国过去有过一个比较,教徒集中的地方捐款比例高,这是宗教文化的因素。那么你再看密西西比比东北部知识水平高,文化自由度高的New Hampshire的捐款比例高就很容易理解了,因为这是教会生活的一个特点,历史上罗马教会也是发行过”赎罪券“的,总的概念就是花钱买未来。
这种现象其实在教会,不论什么教会都是商业行为的性质,是教会赖以在商业社会生存的方式,但在教徒并不是这么认为的,而是个人与上帝的事。

再对比中国就可以看出问题在什么地方了。中国的个人和企业对慈善事业的捐款是不可以减税的(至少几年前是这样),记得当时与国内来的一个有钱人谈论这个问题的时候他说他也愿意捐款扶植什么,但政府不许减税,因此就没有积极性。
但政府这么做也并非没有道理,因为捐款本身在一个法制不完善的社会里是逃税的最好方式。你捐了一百万,对方收到后给你五百万的收据,你向政府少报四百万的税。如果政府缺乏核实慈善组织的实际获款额度的能力(比如有境外问题或银行转账监督不完善),那么这就成功地给四百万逃税或甚至是洗钱(如果是黑钱的话)。
美国从慈善事业的鼻祖卡内基梅隆开始,就定义了”慈善事业是富人根据自己的意愿来改造世界的方式“的概念,就是有钱自己花,而不是由政府花。
这样就可以理解为什么比尔盖茨说要把全部钱都捐出去的原因(他只给孩子每人留了七千五百万),因为其捐款都是捐给了自己的基金会,用于非洲的疾病和卫生条件的改善。如果他全部留给孩子,在这个级别的遗产税是75%,那么绝大多数钱会给了政府。
因此在其死后,不论怎么样,这些钱也都是自己的人控制,包括其后代。
就是捐款其实是个主观为自己,客观为他人的性质。而这个事情要想成功,前提是使这个事情商业化,和对政府的游说。
因此这是无关什么”德“的概念,而是基于最大限度的利用资源降低成本的商业概念。
在美国有一个事情必须清楚,就是任何一件事要想成功和能持续,必须是发展成为商业行为,因为美国是世界上商业化程度最高的社会,非商业化的东西是很难维持的,教会是如此,如今美国的国防是如此,包括军队。
那么捐款和慈善事业也是不例外的。
回复 | 0
作者:好同学 留言时间:2012-08-24 08:20:22
您把捐赠想得太复杂了,其实简单得很,也没有那么高尚的境界。

大部分人捐赠都是因为经济上允许,有多余自己用不着的东西,不捐出去反而在家里占地方,或者原有的东西已过时想更新换代,或者搬家运费比买新东西还贵,或者小孩子已经长大他的衣物玩具都用不着了,等等原因。

实际上中国的捐赠也逐渐流行。这些年我亲戚家就捐出很多东西,像什么老式家具,棉被,衣服,电视,收音机,等等。人们生活提高了吗,要赶潮流吗。这在二三十年前是不可能的,那时日子过得很紧不可能捐吗。
回复 | 0
我的名片
汪翔 ,34岁
来自: 美国
注册日期: 2009-10-24
访问总量: 4,613,358 次
点击查看我的个人资料
最新发布
· 小盘股的苦命终结无期
· 人工智能有助中国走向民主化吗?
· 哪些人工智能科技公司最值得投资
· 中学为体,西学为用,是个啥玩意
· 美光科技(MU)的投资价值分析
· 超微电脑(SMCI)值不值得投资
· 生活在中国和美国各自的优劣之处
分类目录
【《人工智能》】
· 如何用人工智能赚钱
· 文本生成视频模型带来的投资机遇
· 智能驾驶技术:谷歌PK百度
· 人工智能对决:ChatGPT PK Gemin
· 智能驾驶技术:谷歌PK特斯拉
· 人工智能两大应用和对应商机
· 人工智能硬件双杰,台北擂台开打
· 华裔,妮可·沙纳汉 好样的!
· 印度超越中国的可能性
· 中国的特别国债:强征还是忽悠
【《股市投资杂谈》】
· 小盘股的苦命终结无期
· 哪些人工智能科技公司最值得投资
· 美光科技(MU)的投资价值分析
· 超微电脑(SMCI)值不值得投资
· 股市周期性预测
· 行为经济学与股市风险预测
· AI 催生的数据中心投资机遇
· 利率点阵图变化与股市走向
· 动物精神和对股市投资的影响
· 华尔街看走眼苹果在WWDC的表现
【华裔精英榜】
· 华裔,妮可·沙纳汉 好样的!
· 元宇宙:FB 完蛋了还是正在酝酿
【《科幻:智慧女神》】
· 科幻:《智慧女神》(3)欲望
· 科幻:《智慧女神》 (2) 情人
· 科幻:《智慧女神》(1) 诞生
【《短篇小说》】
· 感恩节,雪城出轨(下)
· 感恩节,雪城出轨(中)
· 感恩节,雪城出轨(上)
· 求婚
【《国安一号》(科幻小说)】
· 完美的制度(结尾)
· 釜底抽薪
· 秉性使然
· 竭嘶底里
· 铿锵玫瑰
· 人间炼狱
· 不宣而战
· 暗度陈仓
· 精准打击
· 鼹鼠出击
【相聚樱花盛开时】
· 相聚樱花盛开时(20)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(19)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(18)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(17)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(16)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(15)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(14)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(13)
【相聚樱花盛开时】
· 相聚樱花盛开时(12)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(11)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(10)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(9)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(8)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(7)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(5)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(4)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(3)
· 相聚樱花盛开时(2)
【《美国生活》】
· 生活在中国和美国各自的优劣之处
· 87号和93号汽油差价扩大很多,意
· 如果是华裔,早被骂的狗血喷头
· 川普:白宫还是监狱?
· 如何成为健康睿智的超级老人
· 通过南美走线美国的策略
· 财务自由的迷思
· 美国耍横,中国能不能说不?
· 人民币兑美元汇率到了该主动贬值
· 第二次次贷危机会不会到来?
【《面书观察》】
· 面书会成为下一个苹果吗?
【《苹果观察》】
· 苹果的人工智能策略与苹果股票投
· 乔布斯的商战
· 投资者在歧视苹果公司吗?
· Penney的CEO到底误读了什么?
· 是不是苹果真的出了麻烦?
· 大跌之后的苹果价值再评价
· 苹果大跌之后是不是机会?
· 苹果跌了,谁对了?
· 科技产品新周期循环开始了?
· 再议苹果的投资价值
【《美国之最》】
· 美国电影巨星你知多少
· 2012年代价最大的新产品败笔
· 美国单位面积销售最好的零售店
· 美国人最讨厌的行当和机构
· 穷人的钱也很好赚
· 美国最舍得在广告上花钱的公司
· 即将消失的十大品牌
· 医院安全指数最高的十大州
· 维稳做得最好和最差的十大国家
· 美国犯罪率最高的十大都市
【《美国经商日志》】
· 新闻周刊:如何寻找下一个Facebo
· 是什么能让国家、企业长治久安?
· 美国的商业诚信是如何打造的
· 商业思考:亚马逊在忽悠投资者?
· 商业思考: 奢侈品市场的投资机
· 商业思考:最低薪太低与快餐店连
· 商业思考:美国糖果市场的佼佼者
· 美国零售业开始了中国模式?
· 流量最大的十大网站
· 成者萧何败者萧何
【读书与孩子教育】
· 药家鑫教给了我们什么?
· 越来越多的美国人不读书了
· 美国人为什么喜欢读书
· 数码书革命如何影响我们的生活
· 读书、无书读与数码电子书
【海龟与海带话题】
· 祖国,你够格被称为母亲吗?
· 故乡、祖国与自作多情
· 海龟(15):如果懦夫也能生存
· 海龟(14):石油、中国、人民币
· 海龟(13):付出的和获得的
· 海龟(12):钱学森曾经想叛国吗
· 海龟(11):官员博士多与钱学森
· 海龟(10):如果幼稚能够无罪
· 海龟(9):钱学森的尴尬
· 海龟(8):钱学森不访美的困惑
【杂谈】
· 川普真的输了!急了,坐不住了。
· 白人至上之祸
· 以柔克刚川普无策
· 不靠谱的总统
· 欲加之罪与自欺欺人
· 霸道能打天下
· 人类智商何在?
· 川普贸易战的底线在哪?
· 读不懂的美国
· 2018年诺贝尔奖的小遐思
【《中国企业家画像》】
· 国内经营美容院的成功秘密
· 值得给中国的私有企业贷款吗?
· 具有犹太商人素质的企业家?
· 骄雄、赌徒、愚昧,还是天才的企
· 精明的企业家,还是唯利是图的小
· 中国企业家应该是什么样的
· 中国企业家画像之一:孙汉本
· 经营的逻辑与兰世立的“智慧”
【《犹太经商天才》:目录和序言】
· 《犹太经商天才》(连载) 003
· 《犹太经商天才》(连载)002
· 《犹太经商天才》(连载) 001
【金融危机】
· 美国经济进入衰退了吗?
· 《高盛欺诈门》(8)∶打错的“算
· 《高盛欺诈门》(7)∶零和博弈的
· 《高盛欺诈门》(6)∶来自股东的
· 读不懂的中国逻辑(1)
· 《高盛欺诈门》(5)∶陷阱
· 《高盛欺诈门》(4):冰山一角
· 《高盛欺诈门》(3):恨又离不
· 《高盛欺诈门》(2):症结
· 《高盛欺诈门》(1):序幕
【地产淘金】
· 炒房案例之一:南京
· 外资新设房企数大增 千亿美元购
· 该是投资银行股的时候了吗?
· 中国楼市观察(1)
· 地产淘金的最佳时机到了吗?
· 房价突然跌一半,穷人更惨
· 买房、租房与靠房市发财
【我的中国】
· 人工智能有助中国走向民主化吗?
· 中学为体,西学为用,是个啥玩意
· 坚持无产阶级专政,如何执行?
· 关进笼子的:权力 vs 思想
· 神一般的坚持:四项基本原则
· 近代中国的屈辱历史从鸦片战争开
· 解放军攻打台湾:理性与后果
· 三十五年前六四镇压,付出的代价
· 1840年代的中美比较
· 中国的特别国债:强征还是忽悠
【我的书架】
· 今年诺奖得主的代表作《逃离》全
· 《乔布斯的商战》(目录)
· 《乔布斯的商战》出版,感谢读者
· 张五常:人民币在国际上升值会提
· 《博弈华尔街》,让你再一次感悟
· 《危机与败局》目录
· 《危机与败局》出版发行
· 下雪的早晨 (艾青)
· 《奥巴马智取白宫》被选参加法兰
· 下架文章
【《战神林彪传》】
· 《战神林彪传》第二章 (2)
· 《战神林彪传》第二章(1)
· 《战神林彪传》第一章(5)
· 《战神林彪传》第一章(4)
· 《战神林彪传》第一章(3)
· 《战神林彪传》第一章(2)
· 《战神林彪传》第一章(1)
【《犹太经商天才》】
· 《犹太经商天才》: 2.生不逢时
· 第一章:苦命的孩子(1)
【阿里巴巴与雅虎之战】
· 福布斯:马云和他的敌人们
· 阿里巴巴与雅虎之战(2)
· 阿里巴巴与雅虎之战(1)
【《哈佛小子林书豪》】
· 从林书豪身上学到的人生十课之一
· 《哈佛小子林书豪》之二
· 《哈佛小子林书豪》之一
【华裔的战歌】
· 印度裔和华裔在孩子教育上的差异
· 犹太人和华裔教育孩子的特点和异
· 中国不应对骆家辉抱太大的幻想
· 华裔政界之星——刘云平(2)
· 华裔政界之星——刘云平(1)
· 心安则身安,归不归的迷思
· 华裔的战歌(5):谁造就了"
· 华裔的战歌(4):关注社会与被
· 华裔的战歌(3):“全A”情结与失
· 华裔的战歌(2):犹太裔比我们
【国美大战】
· 企业版的茉莉花革命与公司政治
· 国美之战,不得不吸取的十条教训
· 谁来拯救国美品牌
· 国美股权之争:两个男人的战争
· 现在是投资国美的最佳时机吗?
· “刺客”邹晓春起底
· 邹晓春:已经做好最坏的打算
· 愚昧的陈晓与窃笑的贝恩
· 贝恩资本的真面目(附图片)
· 陈晓为什么“勾结”贝恩资本
【《乔布斯的故事》】
· 苹果消息跟踪:如果苹果进入电视
· 乔布斯故事之十四:嬉皮士
· 乔布斯的故事之十三 犹太商人
· 乔布斯的故事之十二:禅心
· 乔布斯的故事之十一:精神导师
· 乔布斯故事之十:大学选择
· 乔布斯的故事之九:个性的形成
· 乔布斯的故事之八:吸食大麻
· 乔布斯的故事之七:胆大妄为
· 乔布斯的故事之六:贪玩的孩子
【中国美容业】
· 国内日化品牌屡被收购 浙江本土
· 外资日化品牌再下一城 丁家宜外
· 强生收购大宝 并购价刷新中国日
· 从两千元到一百亿的寻梦之路
【加盟店经营】
· 转载:太平洋百货撤出北京市场
· Franchise Laws Protect Investo
· Groupon拒绝谷歌收购内幕
· GNC 到底值多少钱?
· 杨国安对话苏宁孙为民:看不见的
· 张近东:苏宁帝国征战史
· 连锁加盟店成功经营的四大要素
· 加盟店经营管理的五大核心问题
· 高盛抢占新地盘 10月将入股中国
【《解读日本》】
· 东京人不是冷静 是麻木冷漠!
· 日本灾难给投资者带来怎样的机会
· 日本地震灾难对世界经济格局的影
· 美国对日本到底信任几何?
· 大地震带来日元大升值的秘密
· 日本原来如此不堪一击
· 灾难面前的日本人民(3)
· 灾难面前的日本人民(2)
· 灾难面前的日本人民(1)
【《乔布斯的商战》】
· 苹果给你上的一堂价值投资课
· 纪念硅谷之父诺伊斯八十四岁诞辰
· 乔布斯的商战(6): 小富靠勤、中
· 乔布斯的商战(5): 搏击命运,机
· 乔布斯的商战(4):从巨富到赤
· 乔布斯的商战(1):偶然与必然
· 让成功追随梦想:悼念乔布斯
【《鹞鹰》(谍战小说,原创)】
· 《鹞鹰》(谍战小说,原创)
【盛世危言】
· 美国长期信用等级下调之后?
· 建一流大学到底缺什么?
· 同样是命,为什么这些孩子的就那
· 中国式“贫民富翁”为何难产
· 做人,你敢这厶牛吗?
· 言论自由与第一夫人变猴子
· “奈斯比特现象”(下)
· “奈斯比特现象”(上)
· 理性从政和智慧当官
· 中国对美五大优势
【第一部 《逃离》】
· 朋友,后会有期
· 师兄,人品低劣
· 开心,老友相见
· 拯救,有心无力
· 别了,无法回头
· 对呀,我得捞钱
· 哭吧,烧尽激情
· 爱情,渐行渐远
· 再逢,尴尬面对
· 不错,真的成熟
【《毒丸》(谍战)】
· 毒丸(13)
· 毒丸(12)
· 毒丸(11)
· 毒丸(10)
· 毒丸(9)
· 毒丸(8)
· 毒丸(7)
· 毒丸(6)
· 毒丸(5)
· 毒丸(4)
【《美国小镇故事》】
· 拜金女(五):免费精子
· 拜金女(四):小女孩的忧伤
· 拜金女(三):丑小鸭变白天鹅
· 拜金女(二):艰难移民路
· 拜金女(一):恶名在外
· 拯救罗伯特(四之四)
· 奇葩的穆斯林(下)
· 奇葩的穆斯林(上)
· 拯救罗伯特(四之三)
· 拯救罗伯特(四之二)
【《追风》(战争小说)】
· 追风:第二十五章
· 追风:第二十四章
· 追风:第二十三章
· 追风:第二十二章
· 追风:第二十一章
· 追风:第二十章
· 追风:第十九章
· 追风:第十八章
· 追风:第十七章
· 追风:第十六章
【菜园子】
· 春天到了,你的大蒜开长了吗?(
· 春天到了,该种韭菜了
· 室内种花,注意防癌
· 我的美国菜园子(3)
· 我的美国菜园子(2)
· 我的美国菜园子(1)
【科幻小说:幽灵对决】
· 幽灵对决:异象与联盟
· 幽灵对决:意识的纠缠
· 科幻小说:幽灵对决: 首次攻击
【魏奎生 作品】
· 童年记忆
· 那年,那月,那思念
· 故乡的老宅
【《爱国是个啥?》】
· 爱国(1): 爱国心是熏陶出来的
【美国投资移民】
· 美国投资移民议题(2)
· 美国投资移民议题(1)
【理性人生】
· 关于汽车保险,你不能不知的
· 感恩之感
· 失败男人背后站着怎样的女人(2
· 什么是男人的成功?
· 失败男人背后站着怎样的女人(1
· 转载:巴菲特的财富观
· 痛悼79年湖北高考理科状元蒋国兵
【《格林伯格传》】
· 114亿人民币的损失该怪谁
· 基于避孕套的哲理
· 成功投资八大要领
· 企业制度的失败是危机的根源
· 斯皮策买春,错在哪?
【《奥巴马大传》】
· 一日省
· 追逐我的企盼
· 保持积极乐观的生活态度
· 陌生的微笑
· 奥巴马营销角度谈心理
· 神奇小子奥巴马
· 相信奇迹、拥抱奇迹、创造奇迹
· 什么样的人最可爱:献给我心中的
· 希拉里和奥巴马将帅谈
· 是你教会了别人怎样对待你
【参考文章】
· 美国最省油的八种汽车
· 美国房市最糟糕的十大州
· 美国历史上最富有的十位总统
· 世界十大债务大国
· 新鲜事:巴菲特投资IBM
· 星巴克的五美元帮助产生就业机会
· 转载: 苹果前CEO:驱逐乔布斯非
· 华尔街日报:软件将吃掉整个世界
· 林靖东: 惠普与乔布斯的“后PC时
· 德国是如何成为欧洲的中国的
【开博的领悟】
· 打造强国需要不同声音
存档目录
2024-07-02 - 2024-07-07
2024-06-01 - 2024-06-30
2024-05-01 - 2024-05-31
2024-04-21 - 2024-04-30
2022-03-01 - 2022-03-17
2022-02-07 - 2022-02-28
2019-08-01 - 2019-08-01
2019-07-01 - 2019-07-14
2019-06-17 - 2019-06-30
2019-05-09 - 2019-05-16
2018-12-02 - 2018-12-13
2018-11-04 - 2018-11-30
2018-10-08 - 2018-10-08
2018-05-02 - 2018-05-07
2018-04-04 - 2018-04-19
2018-03-07 - 2018-03-10
2018-02-05 - 2018-02-22
2017-12-23 - 2017-12-23
2017-11-06 - 2017-11-28
2017-10-09 - 2017-10-30
2017-09-01 - 2017-09-29
2017-08-11 - 2017-08-31
2017-06-19 - 2017-06-19
2017-05-08 - 2017-05-23
2017-04-22 - 2017-04-22
2017-03-02 - 2017-03-02
2017-02-01 - 2017-02-25
2017-01-29 - 2017-01-29
2015-03-02 - 2015-03-02
2014-12-13 - 2014-12-13
2014-09-20 - 2014-09-20
2014-06-10 - 2014-06-10
2014-05-14 - 2014-05-27
2013-12-06 - 2013-12-06
2013-11-01 - 2013-11-29
2013-10-16 - 2013-10-27
2013-09-25 - 2013-09-26
2013-08-27 - 2013-08-28
2013-05-08 - 2013-05-08
2013-04-03 - 2013-04-13
2013-03-06 - 2013-03-24
2013-02-02 - 2013-02-27
2013-01-07 - 2013-01-31
2012-12-01 - 2012-12-30
2012-11-07 - 2012-11-30
2012-10-02 - 2012-10-31
2012-09-03 - 2012-09-26
2012-08-03 - 2012-08-30
2012-07-06 - 2012-07-29
2012-06-01 - 2012-06-21
2012-05-02 - 2012-05-30
2012-04-02 - 2012-04-26
2012-03-01 - 2012-03-30
2012-02-02 - 2012-02-29
2012-01-01 - 2012-01-26
2011-12-02 - 2011-12-30
2011-11-15 - 2011-11-29
2011-10-06 - 2011-10-21
2011-09-07 - 2011-09-23
2011-08-04 - 2011-08-31
2011-05-01 - 2011-05-01
2011-04-01 - 2011-04-16
2011-03-01 - 2011-03-31
2011-02-07 - 2011-02-24
2011-01-23 - 2011-01-24
2010-12-06 - 2010-12-22
2010-11-09 - 2010-11-28
2010-09-01 - 2010-09-28
2010-08-12 - 2010-08-31
2010-05-02 - 2010-05-20
2010-04-01 - 2010-04-30
2010-03-02 - 2010-03-31
2010-01-14 - 2010-01-29
2009-12-01 - 2009-12-22
2009-11-01 - 2009-11-30
2009-10-24 - 2009-10-31
 
关于本站 | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站导航 | 隐私保护
Copyright (C) 1998-2024. Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.