It depends on what you give.

I have given when I had almost nothing to give. If done for the right reasons, both benefit.

Good question and my take on this always gets me into a lot of hot water (lets see what comes from this comment).

I strongly feel most people give out of pity, guilt or simply because cognitive dissonance pushes them. I have done that too many times and sometimes, especially with little things, drop my guard and give without really looking into who or what I am giving to (I give on an annual basis to over 25 groups so it is not about being cheap. I also have 3 groups - and not my daughter - in my estate plan. My late partner also had her portion of the estate willed to 3 orgs. and told her kids about her decision. They honored and respected their mother and were fine with it).

At one time, because I was at a low point in my life I signed on to an Int'l. charity organization and gave for 12 years. I then found I was actually contributing to a group that actually fostered the very thing they said they were against. I woke up and started looking at what I gave to.

I try to use my sense of reason before giving. The adage about giving versus teaching one to fish holds very true. We should only give if thereby doing so will solve a problem. We should not give simply to sustain an ongoing problem! I have done research and come up with a long treatise on the environmental and morality of charity. I have found another adage to be true: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

How about we give to those less fortunate all year long, without judgment, condescension, or expectations?