In response to:
"Yet a well-heeled Republican senator who believes in the efficacy of private action surely ought to be able to part with at least the same fraction of his income as the average poor giver does."
Able? Perhaps. But should he? Arguable. Unwise charity has done a great deal of harm, mainly by persuading its recipients that if they choose not to carry their own weight, others will carry them.
The best charity is:
-- Kept strictly local, so its effects can be monitored;
-- Given to persons whose troubles are not of their own making;
-- NEVER given in cash, but always in sustenance goods: food, clothing, or shelter.
Anything else undercuts the drive to regain one's self-sufficiency.
THERE IS A PASSAGE in Master and Commander, the first of Patrick O'Brian's acclaimed series of historical sea novels, in which Stephen Maturin casually refers to the wealth of James Dillon, one of his shipmates.
"Surely to God you would never call me rich?" Dillon asks with some asperity.
Maturin: "I have ridden over your land."
Dillon: "It's three-quarters of it mountain, and one quarter bog; and even if they were to pay their rent for the rest it would only be a few hundred a year -- barely a thousand."
Maturin: "My heart bleeds for you. I have never...
Volunteer at a local charity! It is also far more rewarding.