Grendel has a great post over at Caffeist.

In my first WANT post, I asked people to list the things they want. We all want things, and we might as well be forthcoming about it rather than letting our impulses sneak up on us when we’re in the store with plastic in our wallets.

In my second WANT post, I suggested that an effective way to curb our consumeristic desires is to impose a 100% tax on ourselves - if we want to spend $250 on a new iPod, that purchase should be accompanied by a $250 charitable donation. I get shiny stuff, and the world becomes a better place.

The problem, of course, is that it’s all too easy to spend money we don’t have. The better your credit rating, the easier it is to get financing for just about anything. I’ve purchased two laptops and a car with no money down and no interest, though I’ve been paying dearly for lots of other purchases that were financed at high rates. After a few years of experiencing this, I’ve become terrible at saving money.

Today, I found the final piece of the puzzle - a way to save incrementally for the things I want and the causes I want to support. It’s called ChipIn, and it’s a social network fundraising tool. If you have a group or cause that you want to raise money for, you start a campaign (called a ChipIn), and post a widget on your website. The widget lets people donate to the cause, and shows the campaign’s progress in real time.

The best part? It’s completely free (for campaigns raising less than $10K). Wow.

My laptop is still in good shape, so I shouldn’t need a new one for a while - which is precisely why I should start saving now, so I’m not tempted with easy credit next time I’m struck by the urge to upgrade. I decided to set a budget of $2500, with the 100% tax going to Kiva (see previous posts). You can see my widget in the sidebar, and there are other formats to choose from. You can also customize the text and color, and have multiple widgets for one campaign:

To be clear, I’m not asking others to donate to my campaign - this is simply a savings account for me. If the money were just in my bank account, I’d never save up $5000. Plus, with ChipIn, I can create as many campaigns as I want, for each of the purchases I’m saving for. The bank would not be happy if I opened a dozen savings accounts, but ChipIn doesn’t seem to mind (though by being the only donor, I’m not exactly using the service as intended - though I’m not violating the TOS). ChipIn is clear that they do not see themselves as a bank, nor are they covered by the FDIC:

ChipIn is not a banking institution
ChipIn processes payment transactions for group events on behalf of customers. ChipIn is not a bank or other chartered depository institution. Funds held by ChipIn or its service providers (including any bank service providers) in connection with the processing of payment transactions are not deposit obligations of customers and are not insured for the benefit of customers by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other governmental agency.

So, there is a bit of a risk involved, but the ChipIn blog is reassuring - they are taking security seriously, and they are poised to succeed in this market. I’m not sure what their revenue model is (they don’t even charge you for the credit card processing fees they surely have to pay, so they must be getting money from somewhere - probably their institutional clients with big fundraising budgets), but it looks like they’re going to be around for a while. At any rate, they’re not the only game in town.

Beyond being a way to save, ChipIn adds a social element. You, my readers, know that I’m going to save for my next laptop, since it’s a commitment I’ve made publicly. And If I have a birthday coming up, I can request contributions to my ChipIn campaign rather than presents - and since people know half of their gift is going to Kiva, they may even give more.

I found ChipIn while looking for a graph widget that would let me track my progress in saving money, but ChipIn goes much farther, and lets me actually collect the money. Cool.

What are you saving for? Post a widget on your website.

From Tony Jones:

Our annual budget is just under $100K — we raise about $30K from individual donations, and the rest comes from our events, publishing partnerships, and the generous contributions of other organizations. We spend the money on the things that make a non-profit organization run: accounting, website, legal advice, travel, and my (part-time) salary.

Since I’m no expert at putting together budgets, I asked a couple of EV’s friends to help me this fall. One of them, who has lots of experience in budgeting for non-profits, wrote me this upon seeing the first draft: “Tony, I’m initially amazed at the broad reach that Emergent has achieved with such a small budget.” My point in telling you this to to say, as publicly as I can, that EV has no desire to expand into a large bureaucracy. The board affirmed again last month, that we’d like the infrastructure to stay relatively small.

I must say that I don’t like the idea of Emergent needing money. However, the reality is that they do, and they are making a sincere effort to keep their overhead and infrastructure small. They’re doing good work, and they need our support.

Update: Emergent is now accepting PayPal.

From Michael Zimmerman:

The Second Annual Evolution Sunday will occur on February 11th 2007. Your help is needed to make this day a success. This date is an opportunity for congregations across the country (indeed, around the world) to join together to discuss the compatibility of religion and science. Evolution Sunday is being sponsored by The Clergy Letter Project, a collection of more than 10,400 members of the Christian clergy who have signed a letter asserting that Christianity and modern evolutionary science need not be at odds with one another.

In a two paragraph plea (reproduced below), these Christian clergy members assert that they “believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests.” They go on to urge that modern evolutionary theory rather than any form of creationism or intelligent design be taught in our country’s public schools and conclude by requesting that “We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.”

One of the main goals of The Clergy Letter Project is to demonstrate to the broad spectrum of Christian believers that, unlike what is being shrilly shouted by many fundamentalist ministers, a choice does not have to be made between religion and science. Because the two are compatible, congregants should feel comfortable accepting both. Additionally, the signers of The Clergy Letter want to go on record making it clear that those fundamentalist ministers are not speaking for the majority of Christian clergy.

Last year, in an attempt to further this message and to elevate the quality of the national discussion on this topic, The Clergy Letter Project sponsored the First Annual Evolution Sunday event. On this day, 467 congregations from every state, the District of Columbia and five countries participated by hearing sermons, having an adult education class or a children’s Sunday school class, or joining in a lunch discussion group. While each participating congregation chose an event that made the most sense locally, together a major international statement was made.

Last year, Evolution Sunday received a great deal of very positive national publicity with articles in virtually every major newspaper in the country. Indeed, the one in the New York Times was the most e-mail article for the week it appeared. Additionally, it is clear the event hit a nerve with creationists: both the Discovery Institute and Answers in Genesis issued press releases condemning Evolution Sunday.

The Second Annual Evolution Sunday event has now been scheduled for 11 February 2007. If you are a part of a congregation, please think about having it participate. It is only by broadening the base in this way that we will be able to reach out to a growing number of people and, hopefully, improve the understanding that people have about the interrelationship between science and religion.

Signing up is easy. Simply send an e-mail to Michael Zimmerman at mz@butler.edu indicating your congregation’s desire to participate along with the name and location of your congregation and its leader. Your congregation will be immediately added to the growing list.

The Clergy Letter Project’s web pages provide more than 50 sermons delivered by clergy last year on this topic. Check them out at www.evolutionsunday.org. So, if you or a member of the clergy you know are in need of ideas, this is a good place to start.

Additionally, if you are a member of the Clergy and have not yet signed The Clergy Letter, please think about doing so. A note with your name, congregation (optional) and address to mz@butler.edu will get you signed up.

Most importantly, please help by spreading the word about The Clergy Letter Project and Evolution Sunday to others who might be interested in participating. Please forward this note to friends and colleagues and ask them to do the same. Please post this note on as many list serves as you can. In short, please help us reach more people as quickly as we can. Efforts like this will make a positive difference for both religion and science around the country.

Michael Zimmerman, Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and Professor of Biology at Butler University, Indianapolis, Indiana, is the founder of The Clergy Letter Project.

Visit The Clergy Letter Project on the Web at www.evolutionsunday.org

The Clergy Letter

Within the community of Christian believers there are areas of dispute and disagreement, including the proper way to interpret Holy Scripture. While virtually all Christians take the Bible seriously and hold it to be authoritative in matters of faith and practice, the overwhelming majority do not read the Bible literally, as they would a science textbook. Many of the beloved stories found in the Bible - the Creation, Adam and Eve, Noah and the ark - convey timeless truths about God, human beings, and the proper relationship between Creator and creation expressed in the only form capable of transmitting these truths from generation to generation. Religious truth is of a different order from scientific truth. Its purpose is not to convey scientific information but to transform hearts.

We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.

Signed by 10,418 Christian clergy member as of 19 December 2006

More info

Having posted that, I can’t say that I think evolution offers all the answers. For starters, it lacks a viable theory of biogenesis - how life began in the first place. Second, I don’t think every implication or popular conception of evolution is accurate. Third, I think there is just as much blindness to the data among advocates of evolution as there is among advocates of intelligent design. See Icons of Evolution: Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution is Wrong.

But it’s definitely worth discussing.

The PodBible project is an effort by a New Zealand church to record the whole bible in MP3 format and offer it for free download. Quite a bit of the bible is available on their site currently.

If you’ve seen Whale Rider, the NZ accent will sound familiar. Subscribe to this podcast URL to have iTunes grab the new chapters automatically.

The version is CEV, licensed by the Bible Society in NZ. It may not be quite as cool as hearing Johnny Cash read the New Testament, but it’s free and a great example of participatory culture - ordinary church members contributed to a project that will benefit people around the world.

Today I renewed our car’s TerraPass, and added one for our home. Overall, we emit about 45,000 lbs of CO2 each year, which is staggering to me.

They are also selling funny greeting cards:

As I’ve mentioned before, I am starting a blog network, and I’d like to launch a large number of new blogs over the next few months.

I would like to have several blogs focusing on current TV shows, including American Idol, which starts up again in January.

If you are interested in blogging about a TV show, check out WebbleYou.net for the particulars. It pays (70% of ad revenue generated by the site), and there are no out-of-pocket expenses to you, and you can cross-post (that is, you can post the same thing to your WebbleYou Blog Network blog and to your personal blog, so your existing blog doesn’t suffer from your participation with the WebbleYou Blog Network).

In the first post on this experiment, I asked people to list the things that they are most tempted to buy for themselves.

Obviously, taking a hard look at my list and paring it down substantially is the first step in reducing my consumeristic desires.

However, I don’t think it can stop there, because ultimately, we do buy stuff for ourselves, whether we should or not.

That’s why I’m proposing the 100% Self-Tax on Unnecessary Stuff. Here’s how it works:
1. You can buy whatever you want
2. However, you have to contribute an equal amount of money to a good cause, preferably one that benefits the poor (such as Kiva or the Mvule Tree project)

Simple, right? Some advantages of this scheme:
1. Materialism becomes a force for good, because every bit of junk you buy means you are also helping someone in need
2. You buy less junk, because everything ends up costing twice as much

Example: I really would like to have a cool new phone, like the ones shown in the last issue of Wired. If, say, a $700 smartphone (which I can’t afford anyway) cost $1400, I would be even less likely to buy it.

What do you think?