I was reading a filing and it claimed “the faith sector…including Christianity, the largest… contributes approximately $1.2 T to the US economy each year” as backed by some “interdisciplinary journal of research on religion.”
Did anyone realize this? Try a search for “faith sector 1.2 trillion annually”
I feel queasy….
Sounds like a sector that should be taxed appropriately.
US GDP is a bit more than $30 trillion which would mean the faith sector is roughly 1/30 of the whole economy?
If true that is remarkable and scary. But I would be surprised if that is the real number. I guess it depends on what all is being added up.
Exactly. The large majority of churches have to fight just to keep their doors open, and the only thing they “contribute to the economy” is the money they pay for utility bills. Televangelists, however, are a different form of animal. The pastor’s “parsonage” is usually something akin to mansion, and “transportation” may include a Rolls Royce and a yacht.
Religious based schools employ almost half a million full-time teachers, not to mention other staff. So there’s that.
Assuming 150M “religious people” in the US, which is about half the population, that means an average annual expenditure on their religion of about $6,666 dollars. Even if we double the number of religious people, that’s still over $3,000 per person, per year. I mean, that’s not completely outrageous, but it does seem kind of high.
Are we counting sectarian universities and hospitals as part of “faith’s” impact on the economy?
These people would still exist and contribute to the economy at the same level if they were not in sectarian institutions.
That is what I was thinking.
I found this abstract. I think you can see the study if you register on the site but but I didn’t bother.
I think this is the relevant article and it does include schools.
Happy reading…
I don’t know if “contribute” is the right word. If religion didn’t exist, that $1.2 trillion would just go into other sectors of the economy instead.
I agree. “Channels” might be a better word. Some people contribute money, which then gets spent, whereas if it weren’t contributed it would just be spent directly by those people. Some of it might be invested, which would probably be a good thing too.
Not necessarily. I bet a not insignificant amount would just go into savings accounts.
Don’t forget about religious-oriented merchandise like books, music, halal or kosher foods, etc.
So if you buy chocolate raisin babkas it counts as “faith spending”?
I’ll add I read the claim in the IPO filing for “Gloo Holdings” which is some sort of “faith” based tech company, backed by a firm called “Thrivent Financial for Lutherans.”
Well. no. First, they’d be taxed properly. And second, they’d likely be doing something that contributes more to the economy than what amounts to busywork.
Others are challenging the high dollar figure. I want to focus on the concept of “contribute.”
Copper and iron mines contribute by bringing useful metals to the earth’s surface. Wheat farmers contribute by converting CO2 and water into food.
But spending at churches is often just spending in lieu of other entertainment. Instead of spending to build more convents, parochial schools or monasteries, more building of playgrounds, public schools or brothels could be afforded. I don’t debate the relative value of convents and brothels; I just challenge an approach to measure sectors’ “contributions.”