West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: Jome on July 15, 2004, 08:34:23 PM
-
I'm asking it as a question, here's the different answers I think might be true..
1. U.S. is a superpower and realizes that U.N. is growing bigger and stronger, and might be (is becoming) a superpower in it's own.
U.S. wants to be THE biggest, and make most of the decisions. Inferiority complex.. ?
2. U.S. likes to act/handle on their own, and does not want a 2nd opinion.
The other 14 members of the security council might cause problems.
3. U.N. is based on the idea of bringing peace to the world.
U.S. will decide this themselves, wether they want peace or war.
4. U.N. have 191 member countries, U.S. thinks this is too much.
This could also interfere if a war should be the topic.
Add on, for or against U.N.. ??
-
And because the UN was right, Iraq doesn't have weapons of destruction.
-
The reasons Americans don't like the U.N. is because we foot the bill, every time. If there's a U.N. sanctioned war, it's American's doing the fighting, largely, and it's Americans paying the bill, largely. However; when we want something, we have to beg and plead and leave ourselves @ the mercy of piciune little countries who have nowhere near the investment we do in the U.N.... so it's just not worth the hassle.
-
But for the betterment of the world, we need to have a bigger role in things, because we are the largest power. We are sharing this globe with 6 billion people, and we can't be selfish, many out there are starving, and need our help. We have our own issues, but in the bigger picture, our problems are not as big as many the world faces. We are so stuck on ourselves though, we think this is the case. The reason the U.N. didn't want us in Iraq is because they knew they had no weapons, and Bush was going alittle power hungry. They said jack shit when we invaded Afganistan. We have to look at would we want, and is it right. The U.N. allowed us to invade Afganistan, and other nations offered help. The opposite is of Iraq, ask yourself why. We talked about weapons. Bush didn't say to the international world we need to invade Iraq so the people can be free of his rule. NO, he said weapons, and the U.N. inspected, and there was no weapons, so what was the U.N. suppose to do. Allow us to invade Iraq just because we want to. They allowed us to invade Afganistan, what more do you want?
-
youkno what, some of what you said is true jome but also what trauma said is tru also.
-
Because Americans have the mentality of running things. Kinda like when the rest of the world uses the metric system and America goes "Fuck that, we're using English".
I wish the US would stick with the UN. People are saying that we usually have to pay the costs for the UN, but we end up paying them anyways. We might as well pay and have international backing at the same time.
-
lol @ fuck that we're using english...
thats not american 8)
-
The reasons Americans don't like the U.N. is because we foot the bill, every time. If there's a U.N. sanctioned war, it's American's doing the fighting, largely, and it's Americans paying the bill, largely. However; when we want something, we have to beg and plead and leave ourselves @ the mercy of piciune little countries who have nowhere near the investment we do in the U.N.... so it's just not worth the hassle.
Yea jome, this is basically the reason why i dont care about the U.N.
Back then the U.N. was an important thing for peace in the world, but nowadays its just not worth it anymore. Whenever a country needs americas help, america thinks nothing about it, and sends troops (and alot for that matter), but its like when we wanted to go into iraq, the un wanted nothing to do with us. Granted there were no WMD, but at the time when colin powell was presenting the case to the UN, nobody knew that. For all anyone knew, iraq did have some, but the UN did nothing. So we said screw the UN and went on our own.
Basically the UN is just a place for little countries to unite, but large countries like America get nothing out of being in the UN except for large bills like trauma said. If there is a war do you think we really care if we have the support of small countries like the phillipine army by our side?
-
lol @ fuck that we're using english...
thats not american 8)
I mean the english system, instead of the metric system.
-
i wish i knew the metric system. cuz i always read shit in KM and so on. then i have to translate it into my stuff so i know what the fuck there talking about >:(
-
LOL @ the metric vs. english system. I had to learn both because my dad worked on cars, so foreign cars used metric, and American cars until the mid 80's I think used english, but now they use metric too.
Anyways... I remember our great relation with the U.N. We used to always have the U.N. support what we want, because we would act in what we thought was the best interest of the word. But now, we act for the best interest of ourselves. We don't care about what's best for world peace, but for our security. We aren't suffering. We own over 50% of the world's wealth, actually I think it's closer to 70%, but anyways, we don't have that much of the world's population, but own most of the wealth. We need to help the rest of the world.
-
We need to help the rest of the world.
Why?
-
We need to help the rest of the world.
Why?
Exactly. The world gets so pissed off at us, then comes crying back askin for our help.
-
We need to help the rest of the world.
Why?
Exactly. The world gets so pissed off at us, then comes crying back askin for our help.
As the saying goes... What Would Jesus Do? He would help people, and conservatives that argue about Christian values the loudest should know this. Don't even make me get the Bible in this.
For liberals who agree with the U.N., to preserve peace in the world, prevent a huge war, and to support poor nations that can barely feed their people. The U.N. is not a world government as people believe, it's a group of nations that come together and try to do what's best for the globe as a whole. After all, the U.S. does not compare with 6 billion people, 5 billion of them living in 3rd World nations. We need to help, not be like, we have money, fuck them. There is so much more than our money. Why can't you guys see that?
-
As the saying goes... What Would Jesus Do? He would help people, and conservatives that argue about Christian values the loudest should know this. Don't even make me get the Bible in this.
For liberals who agree with the U.N., to preserve peace in the world, prevent a huge war, and to support poor nations that can barely feed their people. The U.N. is not a world government as people believe, it's a group of nations that come together and try to do what's best for the globe as a whole. After all, the U.S. does not compare with 6 billion people, 5 billion of them living in 3rd World nations. We need to help, not be like, we have money, fuck them. There is so much more than our money. Why can't you guys see that?
Real talk, U.N. isn't "a gathering of small countries to feed off the big countries", it's 191 countries, that's pretty much every country..
And U.S. does NOT rank high on the "Rich country responsibilities: Aid" statistics.
They might give the most totally, but if you divide it with "per capita", it's sad reading.. :-X
U.S.A. uses $46 per citizen for aid..
The top 5 aid contribution countries are:
1. Norway - $333 per citizen
2. Luxembourg - $316 per citizen
3. Denmark - $286 per citizen
4. Sweden - $207 per citizen
5. Netherlands - $196 per citizen
...
18. U.S. - $46 per citizen
U.S. is one of very few countries who actually use LESS money on Aid in 2002 than in 1990.. that should say something.
But some of you will rather use the money on war, instead of helping homeless and starving people with medications, food, etc. right.. ?
-
So you're telling me that...
$46 X 293 million is less than $333 x 4 million?
I guess I'm not that good at math.
-
So you're telling me that...
$46 X 293 million is less than $333 x 4.5 million?
I guess I'm not that good at math.
I'm telling you that $333 per citizen is A LOT MORE than $46 per citizen.
Try comparing yourselves with Monaco or San Marino, I bet that will give Americans a real self esteem boost.. :) (At least until you divide down the numbers to make the comparison fair)
-
According to your numbers, each US citizen gives 46 dollars per year in "aid"
We have 293 million citizens.
293,000,000 multiplied by 46 equals $13,478,000,000. Thats 13 billion dollars.
Lets take Norway.
According to your Numbers Each citizen of Norway gives $333 dollars per year in "aid"
4,500,000 multiplied by 333 equals $1,498,500,000. Thats 1 billion dollars.
It's the bottom line that counts, and you're nowhere near the US in total amount given.
-
i'm sorry you can call me an ass hole or a heartless cunt,BUT i'm not going to feed and spend 333 bucks out of MY tax money to give to some dirty homeless german dude who probably fucking hates me cuz i'm american.....333 to a homeless dude in IOWA or New Mexico maybe but in my opinion 46 bucks is more than appropriate.
-
Because Americans have the mentality of running things. Kinda like when the rest of the world uses the metric system and America goes "Fuck that, we're using English".
I wish the US would stick with the UN. People are saying that we usually have to pay the costs for the UN, but we end up paying them anyways. We might as well pay and have international backing at the same time.
Regarding the metric system, The main reason I understand for not adopting it, is that the cost would be prohibitive.
Even if we phased it in slowly, heavy machinery, screw threads, and a bunch of other shit would still be a huge problem and it would take a LONG ass time and a bunch of money to make it official.
The way I see it, It's not too hard to use conversions. If there are 2.2lbs in a kg. Then it's easy enough to use the quick multiply by 11 rule and then multiply by two. So for 52kg it's easy to say that 5 + 2 = 7 so 52*11 = 572 or 52 * 1.1 = 57.2 and 57.2 * 2 = 114.4. So 52kg = about 114 lbs.
For feet to meters, there are a few simple and fast conversions that aren't of great precision, but accurate enough for me. For example, 3m = 10ft, 1 in. = 2.54cm, 1m = 40in. Of course for precision, I would alway use a calculator...
Regarding volume. For a fast calculation, you can simply relate the liter to the quart since when it comes to serving drinks, there's not a great deal of difference. When I need precision, it's easy to remember the numbers I've seen on American Coke bottles my entire life. A 2 liter bottle always says 67.6 fluid ounces on it. This is my base point for conversion since I can gather that 33.8 fl oz is 1 liter.
For temperature, that's a no brainer. 0c is freezing, 100c is boiling. 32F is freezing, 212F is boiling. So 212 - 32 = 180 and 100 - 0 = 100. Therefore it's easy to assume that 180/100 is the ratio. That easily converts to 9/5. Be sure to compensate for the 32 degree shift on the Fahrenheit side.
So what it comes down to is that if you can get through school in any country without understanding that both systems are just really simple. If you don't get it, then go back to school and work on it. If you can remember there's 12 inches in a foot and 8 oz in a cup, then you can remember 3 points of conversion reference and derive the rest.
-
According to your numbers, each US citizen gives 46 dollars per year in "aid"
We have 293 million citizens.
293,000,000 multiplied by 46 equals $13,478,000,000. Thats 13 billion dollars.
Lets take Norway.
According to your Numbers Each citizen of Norway gives $333 dollars per year in "aid"
4,500,000 multiplied by 333 equals $1,498,500,000. Thats 1 billion dollars.
It's the bottom line that counts, and you're nowhere near the US in total amount given.
lmao... so America cares more, because they have a higher population? Now that's some bullshit right there.
Norway >>>>>>>>> America when it comes to this. The End.
-
no i think hes getting at this.
Yea those countries pay more per citizen, but thats only because they have less citizens. If they paid the same as american citizens, then they wouldnt be giving nearly as much in aid. (somewhere in the millions i dont wanna do the math). But if we as americans were giving $333 per citizen, then we would be giving ALOT of money in "aid"
-
According to your numbers, each US citizen gives 46 dollars per year in "aid"
We have 293 million citizens.
293,000,000 multiplied by 46 equals $13,478,000,000. Thats 13 billion dollars.
Lets take Norway.
According to your Numbers Each citizen of Norway gives $333 dollars per year in "aid"
4,500,000 multiplied by 333 equals $1,498,500,000. Thats 1 billion dollars.
It's the bottom line that counts, and you're nowhere near the US in total amount given.
lmao... so America cares more, because they have a higher population? Now that's some bullshit right there.
Norway >>>>>>>>> America when it comes to this. The End.
I guess you don't realize the real world implications that 13 billion dollars is more than 1 billion.
Keep living in your warped little world stinky.
-
Oh God ::)
First and foremost, 333 per citizen is not greater than 42. Also, they give more, that's cool, but in the end, most nations actually love us. Many other industral nations don't, but almost every 3rd world nation is very much fans of the United States. When you think of foreign opinion, most news gives you the other big nations, because to us, if you have money, then your worth our time, if not, we can careless. African nations love us, they admire us. Now Bush has a lot to do with the resent negative opinion of us, I mean unjust wars because he wants too, wars that seem to be against another religion, it doesn't look good. But in the end, these country like what we are doing. The sad fact is though, is they followed the food we gave to hungry nations, and it gets to them, but the sad fact is that by the time it is spread out to everybody, it's only a weeks worth of food to last a month or so. What can be done? Instead of just food aid, help in many other ways. Jesus said if you give a man a fish, he eats for a day, you teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime. Well, for one, in Africa, we can stop robbing the countries there of diamonds, and all there other resources and start paying the people what they deserve for their work and rocks. Also, we can encourage businesses expand, and open up factories and stuff. I know the world is against sweat shops, and I'm not saying sweat shops, but try to have legit businesses go to these starving nations. Plenty of people will be more than willing to work, and African is rich with resources, so it would be cheaper to make things there, even if you pay the people a fair wage. The U.N. can help too, that's there job. Encourage other wealthy nations to help out, we need a worldwide effort to help out the hungry nations of the world. Not just the U.S., but also not excluding the U.S. The U.N. has done many things to help preserve peace, but we need to find away to help the hungry nations, and the poor children there. After all, most children don't survive to see their 18th birthday, mothers are always burying their children. In a world where someone like Bill Gates baths in a solid gold bath tub, it's unfair that families can't keep babies 'cause they are starving. We need more.
-
Oh God ::)
First and foremost, 333 per citizen is not greater than 42. Also, they give more, that's cool, but in the end, most nations actually love us. Many other industral nations don't, but almost every 3rd world nation is very much fans of the United States. When you think of foreign opinion, most news gives you the other big nations, because to us, if you have money, then your worth our time, if not, we can careless. African nations love us, they admire us. Now Bush has a lot to do with the resent negative opinion of us, I mean unjust wars because he wants too, wars that seem to be against another religion, it doesn't look good. But in the end, these country like what we are doing. The sad fact is though, is they followed the food we gave to hungry nations, and it gets to them, but the sad fact is that by the time it is spread out to everybody, it's only a weeks worth of food to last a month or so. What can be done? Instead of just food aid, help in many other ways. Jesus said if you give a man a fish, he eats for a day, you teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime. Well, for one, in Africa, we can stop robbing the countries there of diamonds, and all there other resources and start paying the people what they deserve for their work and rocks. Also, we can encourage businesses expand, and open up factories and stuff. I know the world is against sweat shops, and I'm not saying sweat shops, but try to have legit businesses go to these starving nations. Plenty of people will be more than willing to work, and African is rich with resources, so it would be cheaper to make things there, even if you pay the people a fair wage. The U.N. can help too, that's there job. Encourage other wealthy nations to help out, we need a worldwide effort to help out the hungry nations of the world. Not just the U.S., but also not excluding the U.S. The U.N. has done many things to help preserve peace, but we need to find away to help the hungry nations, and the poor children there. After all, most children don't survive to see their 18th birthday, mothers are always burying their children. In a world where someone like Bill Gates baths in a solid gold bath tub, it's unfair that families can't keep babies 'cause they are starving. We need more.
Please use:
(http://www.larc.uci.edu/lewc/Symbol1.jpg)'s
Who is to say that Bill gates shouldn't bath in a solid gold bath tub?
He's done more for the poor than you even realize. Ever heard about the bill and melinda gates foundation? Dude donates BILLIONS every year to charity.
-
He's done more for the poor than you even realize. Ever heard about the bill and melinda gates foundation? Dude donates BILLIONS every year to charity.
I am well aware of all the stuff Bill Gates has done for the world. Dude is a good liberal, which is why I used him, because if I can bash one of my own, imagion how I can bash on a conservative.
-
According to your numbers, each US citizen gives 46 dollars per year in "aid"
We have 293 million citizens.
293,000,000 multiplied by 46 equals $13,478,000,000. Thats 13 billion dollars.
Lets take Norway.
According to your Numbers Each citizen of Norway gives $333 dollars per year in "aid"
4,500,000 multiplied by 333 equals $1,498,500,000. Thats 1 billion dollars.
It's the bottom line that counts, and you're nowhere near the US in total amount given.
U.S. give $13.140 mill. to aid.
Norway give $1.517 mill. to aid.
U.S. have 65 times more citizens than Norway, yet U.S. only use 8,6 times more money on aid.
This means that Norway use 7.2 times more aid than U.S. per citizen.
Get it.. ?
Monaco have 32.000 citizens, do you think it would be fair to compare their aid contributions to e.g. Indias 1 BILLION citizens.. ?
No.
Of course you gotta divide the numbers to make the comparison fair.
Do not try to tell me that U.S. could not easily give $500 per citizen in aid, without even TOUCHING the regular Americans income or taxes.
Cut down on that enormous sick war machine of yours instead.
Why don't you pull out some numbers on how many billions you use on wars/military ehh.. ?
i'm sorry you can call me an ass hole or a heartless cunt,BUT i'm not going to feed and spend 333 bucks out of MY tax money to give to some dirty homeless german dude who probably fucking hates me cuz i'm american.....333 to a homeless dude in IOWA or New Mexico maybe but in my opinion 46 bucks is more than appropriate.
But let me ask you this:
If you had the choice to use your tax money on either:
1. Aid - Food, clothes, medications and water for starving/homeless people in development countries.
2. War - Use your money on going to war against e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
What would you choose.. ?
Oh God ::)
First and foremost, 333 per citizen is not greater than 42. Also, they give more, that's cool, but in the end, most nations actually love us. Many other industral nations don't, but almost every 3rd world nation is very much fans of the United States.
$333 per citizen is definitely more than $46 per citizen.
"Most nations actually love us" - Is aid a popularity contest.. ???
-
According to your numbers, each US citizen gives 46 dollars per year in "aid"
We have 293 million citizens.
293,000,000 multiplied by 46 equals $13,478,000,000. Thats 13 billion dollars.
Lets take Norway.
According to your Numbers Each citizen of Norway gives $333 dollars per year in "aid"
4,500,000 multiplied by 333 equals $1,498,500,000. Thats 1 billion dollars.
It's the bottom line that counts, and you're nowhere near the US in total amount given.
lmao... so America cares more, because they have a higher population? Now that's some bullshit right there.
Norway >>>>>>>>> America when it comes to this. The End.
I guess you don't realize the real world implications that 13 billion dollars is more than 1 billion.
Keep living in your warped little world stinky.
What a moron. Sonned and still not shutting the fuck up.
if 2000 ppl give me 100 bucks, and 50 give me 10 bucks, I pretty much realize the 2nd group cares more for me and donates more money per citizen for me. that's what it comes down to.
-
Ah Trauma
The US owes trillions to the UN. So there goes the footing the bill idea. And the US has the most influence on the UN, and the most power ful voice, thus it packs the most powerful gun. Meaning it will always lead the pack militarily.
-
Ah Trauma
The US owes trillions to the UN. So there goes the footing the bill idea. And the US has the most influence on the UN, and the most power ful voice, thus it packs the most powerful gun. Meaning it will always lead the pack militarily.
Yup, so that leaves us with how many good arguments for U.S. to back out of U.N.. ??
Oh well..
-
the US owes money to the UN? really can you prove this?
and while your at it, please show how much each country contributes to the UN
-
the US owes money to the UN? really can you prove this?
and while your at it, please show how much each country contributes to the UN
Youre not on the list of people whose opinions matter to the point where I would actually research a link to back up my argument. The US owes billions to the UN.
-
Ah Trauma
The US owes trillions to the UN. So there goes the footing the bill idea. And the US has the most influence on the UN, and the most power ful voice, thus it packs the most powerful gun. Meaning it will always lead the pack militarily.
Yup, so that leaves us with how many good arguments for U.S. to back out of U.N.. ??
Oh well..
It would be stupid for both sides to sever their relationship. The UN and the US need each other, albiet the US is a lot less reliant.
-
the US owes money to the UN? really can you prove this?
and while your at it, please show how much each country contributes to the UN
Youre not on the list of people whose opinions matter to the point where I would actually research a link to back up my argument. The US owes billions to the UN.
.....ok. If you knew it was a fact then you could present some evidence of this.
-
next time do ur own homework
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/docs/wren.htm
-
next time do ur own homework
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/docs/wren.htm
That's 1998 though..
99-numbers: $1.3 billion:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/docs/fin99-1.htm
2001: Still owing about $1 billion:
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/09/un.debt/
I haven't seen the newest numbers.. I think I heard something last year about the bill getting even higher, but can't remember the details..
-
thanks for the recent info
and yeah, I dont see this tab gettin any lighter under the current administration
-
owned lol
-
its not recent but ill give you that.
But still my point is this. you'll never see any other country owing the UN a billion dollars...why? because America has to fund the most money to the UN, and for what.
-
its not recent but ill give you that.
But still my point is this. you'll never see any other country owing the UN a billion dollars...why? because America has to fund the most money to the UN, and for what.
What do you mean for what? Their is a reason why America pays alot, because it has a powerful voice within the UN? What do u think poor America is being extorted for billions while having the same influence as Botswana?
-
What do u think poor America is being extorted for billions while having the same influence as Botswana?
LOL
-
Do not try to tell me that U.S. could not easily give $500 per citizen in aid, without even TOUCHING the regular Americans income or taxes.
Cut down on that enormous sick war machine of yours instead.
Why don't you pull out some numbers on how many billions you use on wars/military ehh.. ?
Show me how we could do that. Please break down the numbers for me.
-
What a moron. Sonned and still not shutting the fuck up.
if 2000 ppl give me 100 bucks, and 50 give me 10 bucks, I pretty much realize the 2nd group cares more for me and donates more money per citizen for me. that's what it comes down to.
Here's your formula:
1.) Bash the US with a poorly constructed paranoid argument.
2.) Get shown facts and arguments backed up with reason.
3.) ??????
4.) Claim you "Sonned" people.
What could possibly go through your head to make you think that 13 billion dollars is less than 1 billion dollars?
-
Ok, here's some facts for that azz, especially for you Engel:
* U.S. uses the most money on military, in fact it uses as much as countries ranked number 2 to 18 in the world COMBINED.
* The 2004 military budget for U.S. was predicted to $400 BILLION, but I will not be surprised if it ends up at 450 to 500.
* $400 Billion divided on 294 Million Americans = NO LESS than $1360 (!!!!) per citizen.
* If the total ends up on 450 bill. or 500 bill. instead, each American will pay $1530 or $1700.
You're still telling me that U.S. can not afford $500 per capita in aid, instead of bombing them.. ??
Case closed.
-
Please name me one country that gives more money than the United States. (Japan might be up there, but I think we still give more)
Also Jome, what we've been discussing, is official government aid. Take a look at this article
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0623/p11s02-wmpi.htm
When the going gets tough, Americans keep giving - to the tune of nearly $241 billion.
Charitable donations for 2002 set a new high, rising 1 percent over 2001's total in current dollars, according to Giving USA, a report released Monday by the American Association of Fundraising Counsel's Trust for Philanthropy in Indianapolis. The estimated $240.92 billion in gifts equaled 2.3 percent of US gross domestic product.
True not all of this is Forgien aid, but I'l be willing to bet that more than 10% of that goes over seas.
Case Closed?
-
That's voluntarily donations from individuals & companies..
And a lot of that does not even go overseas, we're talking about the OFFICIAL aid here.
I proved my point.. that the average U.S. citizen funds 30 times as much money on war, than they fund aid.
You could argue that Americans voluntarily donates to aid, cuz they know that the government uses 30 times as much money on war than they do on aid, THAT would be a valid argument.
-
What a moron. Sonned and still not shutting the fuck up.
if 2000 ppl give me 100 bucks, and 50 give me 10 bucks, I pretty much realize the 2nd group cares more for me and donates more money per citizen for me. that's what it comes down to.
Here's your formula:
1.) Bash the US with a poorly constructed paranoid argument.
2.) Get shown facts and arguments backed up with reason.
3.) ??????
4.) Claim you "Sonned" people.
What could possibly go through your head to make you think that 13 billion dollars is less than 1 billion dollars?
Here's your formula:
1.) Defend the US no matter how cruel, unjustified, ignorant, hypocritical, double-standard-based, senseless, useless, silly etc its behaviour or anything else for that matter is.
2.) Search for neo-conservative Websites and try to find some questionable statistics or an article written by a true american patriot.
3.) Get personally offended by anything no matter how true it is someone says against the US.
4.) Then finally, as ironic as it sounds and actually also is, claim other ppl are biased and ignorant.
5.) When you eventually get sonned, which is most likely inevitable, try to offend the person who sonned you personally. Waste a whole new thread for it if youre pleased.
What could possibly go through your head to make you think that 330 bucks arent more than 50.
-
That's voluntarily donations from individuals & companies..
And a lot of that does not even go overseas, we're talking about the OFFICIAL aid here.
I proved my point.. that the average U.S. citizen funds 30 times as much money on war, than they fund aid.
You could argue that Americans voluntarily donates to aid, cuz they know that the government uses 30 times as much money on war than they do on aid, THAT would be a valid argument.
Last time I checked, it wasn't the governments duty to fund aid to other countries.
-
Last time I checked, it wasn't the governments duty to fund aid to other countries.
No.. ?
So U.S. giving $13 billion in aid must be a terrible mix-up.. ?
Somebody slipped with the pen in the budgets.. ?
-
Nope. I'd say it was an indication of how Generous the United States is. We don't have to do shit, but we do anyways.
-
Nope. I'd say it was an indication of how Generous the United States is. We don't have to do shit, but we do anyways.
Every country donate aid, and 17 of the countries give more of their budgets, don't make it seem like U.S. is so kind and special for doing it.
Typical American arrogance.
-
Nope. I'd say it was an indication of how Generous the United States is. We don't have to do shit, but we do anyways.
Every country donate aid, and 17 of the countries give more of their budgets, don't make it seem like U.S. is so kind and special for doing it.
Typical American arrogance.
Jome... A couple of questions.
1.) Name me one country that gives more foreign aid per year than the United States.
2.) If you had a job where you made 50 dollars per hour but only worked for 5 hours a week, would that be better than a job where you made 20 dollars an hour but worked 40 hours a week?
3.) Why is it arrogant to say that we donate more money than any other country out there?
-
Let's say you're homeless.
4 people come up to you and say: "We are each going to give you 50 dollars to help you out."
Would you like that better than if one person came up to you and said: "I'm gonna give you 600 dollars to help you out." ???
It's pure logic.
Also lay off the personal attacks. You don't see me dissing you personally because of your views do you?
-
Jome... A couple of questions.
1.) Name me one country that gives more foreign aid per year than the United States.
2.) If you had a job where you made 50 dollars per hour but only worked for 5 hours a week, would that be better than a job where you made 20 dollars an hour but worked 40 hours a week?
3.) Why is it arrogant to say that we donate more money than any other country out there?
1. I already named 16 countries that spend MORE of their budget on aid than U.S., U.S probably have as much citizens as these 16 countries COMBINED, so judging the total amount would be useless.
2. Yes, it would be better. Working only 5 hours for a very decent 50 dollars/hour would mean that I could easily take another job.
3. I think it's arrogant when one of the richest countries in the world have the attitude "We don't really have to give jack shit, we're just so generous and kind that we give"
It's also arrogant to compare a country with 294 million people to countries with 3-50 million people without using the proper perspective.
Let's say you're homeless.
4 people come up to you and say: "We are each going to give you 50 dollars to help you out."
Would you like that better than if one person came up to you and said: "I'm gonna give you 600 dollars to help you out."
It's pure logic.
You missed a vital point.
If the $600 man you're referring to, is supposed to be the American "samaritan", then you forgot about the statistics.
Here's how it should be:
If 10 Americans all said they would give you $46 each, would you like that better than if 1 Norwegian offered you $333.. ??
Of course the Americans would give more money in total, but I'd still think that the Norwegian is nicer because he's offering as much money as 7 of the Americans do combined, on his own.
-
Jome... A couple of questions.
1.) Name me one country that gives more foreign aid per year than the United States.
2.) If you had a job where you made 50 dollars per hour but only worked for 5 hours a week, would that be better than a job where you made 20 dollars an hour but worked 40 hours a week?
3.) Why is it arrogant to say that we donate more money than any other country out there?
1. I already named 16 countries that spend MORE of their budget on aid than U.S., U.S probably have as much citizens as these 16 countries COMBINED, so judging the total amount would be useless.
2. Yes, it would be better. Working only 5 hours for a very decent 50 dollars/hour would mean that I could easily take another job.
3. I think it's arrogant when one of the richest countries in the world have the attitude "We don't really have to give jack shit, we're just so generous and kind that we give"
It's also arrogant to compare a country with 294 million people to countries with 3-50 million people without using the proper perspective.
Who cares how much a country gives out of it's budget? Do you really think that makes a country "Better" than another just because it gives more in it's budget than another? In my book, it's the bottom line that counts. I could care less how much money each country gives out of it's GDP. It's the final dollar amount that counts.
You missed a vital point.
If the $600 man you're referring to, is supposed to be the American "samaritan", then you forgot about the statistics.
Here's how it should be:
If 10 Americans all said they would give you $46 each, would you like that better than if 1 Norwegian offered you $333.. ??
Of course the Americans would give more money in total, but I'd still think that the Norwegian is nicer because he's offering as much money as 7 of the Americans do combined, on his own.
Let me explain it to you. In that last analogy, a country = person.
-
Who cares how much a country gives out of it's budget? Do you really think that makes a country "Better" than another just because it gives more in it's budget than another? In my book, it's the bottom line that counts. I could care less how much money each country gives out of it's GDP. It's the final dollar amount that counts.
OK, then we'll count up all the European countries contributions (727 million people or so).. "Hurray, we give the most money!" ::)
See how backwards it is.. ?
No.. ?
-
Who cares how much a country gives out of it's budget? Do you really think that makes a country "Better" than another just because it gives more in it's budget than another? In my book, it's the bottom line that counts. I could care less how much money each country gives out of it's GDP. It's the final dollar amount that counts.
OK, then we'll count up all the European countries contributions (727 million people or so).. "Hurray, we give the most money!" ::)
See how backwards it is.. ?
No.. ?
Why would you count up all the people in Europe? I thought we were dealing with countires?
-
To make the comparison fair. ::)
-
I put up a poll in the Gspot... Lets see what happens. I didn't vote. I'm not going to respond either.
Don't vote either to make it even ok?
-
I put up a poll in the Gspot... Lets see what happens. I didn't vote. I'm not going to respond either.
Don't vote either to make it even ok?
lol, it's the same thing as you posted 20 minutes ago..
Obviously you'd want the most money, but that doesn't mean that it's fair to compare 5 people to 1 man, even if the 1 man give more than all the others combined!!
I'm not going to respond either.
SO long for that, that was 7 minutes.
-
I'm not going to respond either.
SO long for that, that was 7 minutes.
I merely clarified the question.
I saw you voted.
-
I saw you voted.
Sure didn't.
(http://img29.exs.cx/img29/5835/sh01.jpg)
-
I don't see how...
Norway = Homeless person
I don't see how....
50 bucks is 13 times the amount of 20 bucks.
-
I don't see how...
Norway = Homeless person
I don't see how....
50 bucks is 13 times the amount of 20 bucks.
Do you see how...
Norway = 4.5 million people
U.S. = 294 million people
You don't have to finish high school to see that U.S. is more likely to have more money than Norway.
-
Jome, You don't need to break out the personal insults. It's just petty and you shouldn't mix up a debate with your own anger.
I don't think Norway can be considered "Homeless" compared to the US.
-
Jome, You don't need to break out the personal insults. It's just petty and you shouldn't mix up a debate with your own anger.
I don't think Norway can be considered "Homeless" compared to the US.
There was no insult.
I just said that anybody can see that you can't compare 2 countries on the same criterias when one of the countries is 65 times more populated.
I do not compare Norway with Monaco's 32.000 citizens, neither do I compare ourselves with India's 1 billion citizens, but size doesn't matter to you.. ?
Let me ask you this:
* You seriously think that every country have the exact same amount of money to spend on military, budgets, aid, etc. ?
They DON'T, and that's why you put it into "perspectives", or use criterias, to make the comparison fair.
That's why U.S. is ranked #8 on the life standard index, instead of #1, something they would have been if you only counted money, and forgot that they have 50 times more citizens than the average country.
I just can't believe why you can not understand the bold part.. ???
-
I see what jome is saying. But why on earth should america have to match your countries "$$ for aid per citizen"? So your country gives more money per citizen.....
So if a country with 1000 people gave $1000 per citizen...Does that mean that they are better then both of our countries because they gave more per citizen? NO
Bottom line is america has alot more citizens, so we dont have to give that much per citizen. And in the end it doesnt matter how many citizens you have, because the only thing any country cares about is the total amount.
-
^^^ good point on the bottom
ok jome here's some situations:
your mother is in the hospital for a lung transplant. you need to raise $60,000 for her stay in the hospital. what you're trying to say is you'd rather have 20 people pitch in $1000 each and you'd be happy because those people are generous instead of 5000 people give $12 each
when your country has been decimated by floods, earthquakes, war, and AIDS outbreak...the bottom line is all that counts. it's good that your country gives more than another country but generosity doesn't rebuild countries, money does
and quite complaing about the situation not being fair, you were gloating that your country was in the top, you're always bragging how your country is the richest, too bad the richest people in your country doesn't add up to masses of people
-
you're always bragging how your country is the richest,
Yeah, you would know.. you've been registered for one day. ::)
So if a country with 1000 people gave $1000 per citizen...Does that mean that they are better then both of our countries because they gave more per citizen? NO
Yes they would be better.
They give more of what they have.
Back on topic again, I haven't seen a good argument to why U.S. should not be in the U.N. yet, all arguments have been torn apart.
-
no they have to give more per citzen because then they wouldnt be giving that much money, and then poor countries would think that your being cheap on them.
-
no they have to give more per citzen because then they wouldnt be giving that much money, and then poor countries would think that your being cheap on them.
???
Doesn't make much sense..
-
The reasoning goes that...
By supporting an organization like this, we are involuntarily supporting dictatorships and/or repressive countries and giving them legitimacy as well as a place to air their hate on an international scale. A "Foxes are in charge of the chicken coop" type argument.
I don't agree that we should get out of the UN, but rather I think the UN needs serious overhauling.
-
Typical American arrogance.
So the moment I say something good about my country I'm arrogant, but you can post whatever you want up praising yours?
Human Development Report 2004
Norway holding it down, for the 4th year in a row.. :)
-
Why are you so concerned with how much each person gives?
-
The reasoning goes that...
By supporting an organization like this, we are involuntarily supporting dictatorships and/or repressive countries and giving them legitimacy as well as a place to air their hate on an international scale. A "Foxes are in charge of the chicken coop" type argument.
I don't agree that we should get out of the UN, but rather I think the UN needs serious overhauling.
Finally some reasonable arguments.. ;)
I do think that U.N. can make these countries better though, U.N. is sanctioning totalistic regimes, they inspect the countries, and they co-operate with Red Cross, "Doctors Without Boundaries", Amnesty Int., and other goodwill organizations, to gradually improve these countries.
Bombing them on the other hand, now that's what creates the most trouble/hate, and leads to even more war.
Take Iraq e.g., they're even worse off now..
Why are you so concerned with how much each person gives?
Not so much about each person, but I think each country should give money according to criterias, like how many citizens they have, how wealthy they are, how high the living standard in general is, how much money the government use on other (maybe even unnecessary) things, ya know..
I'm more peace minded, and when I see countries using hundreds of billions on war, and 1/30th of this on aid, I'm not the only one who get concerned.. :-\
-
you're always bragging how your country is the richest,
Yeah, you would know.. you've been registered for one day. ::)
you know very little ;)
The reasoning goes that...
By supporting an organization like this, we are involuntarily supporting dictatorships and/or repressive countries and giving them legitimacy as well as a place to air their hate on an international scale. A "Foxes are in charge of the chicken coop" type argument.
I don't agree that we should get out of the UN, but rather I think the UN needs serious overhauling.
Finally some reasonable arguments.. ;)
I do think that U.N. can make these countries better though, U.N. is sanctioning totalistic regimes, they inspect the countries, and they co-operate with Red Cross, "Doctors Without Boundaries", Amnesty Int., and other goodwill organizations, to gradually improve these countries.
Bombing them on the other hand, now that's what creates the most trouble/hate, and leads to even more war.
Take Iraq e.g., they're even worse off now..
Why are you so concerned with how much each person gives?
Not so much about each person, but I think each country should give money according to criterias, like how many citizens they have, how wealthy they are, how high the living standard in general is, how much money the government use on other (maybe even unnecessary) things, ya know..
I'm more peace minded, and when I see countries using hundreds of billions on war, and 1/30th of this on aid, I'm not the only one who get concerned.. :-\
ummmm correct me if i'm wrong but the U.N. inspecting countries was never a good thing. it was easy to see that the U.N. was torn on a subject and Sadaam used that to his advantage. he showed how flawed and useless the U.N. actually is
oh and if you're concerned about the U.S. military spending, move here. it's like a safety net knowing that we will defeat any other country and if we don't, we're all going to die anyways
-
you know very little ;)
I know your former identity.. ;)
ummmm correct me if i'm wrong but the U.N. inspecting countries was never a good thing. it was easy to see that the U.N. was torn on a subject and Sadaam used that to his advantage. he showed how flawed and useless the U.N. actually is
I never said the U.N. was perfect, that's why it needs big powerful countries to improve it.
it's like a safety net knowing that we will defeat any other country and if we don't, we're all going to die anyways
Great logic.. lol
-
lol sounds like we're in a sci fi thriller with your first line.
2nd so if the U.N. is flawed, why would America want to stay with it or any other country for that matter? what makes the U.N. flawed, is the lack of checks and balances. there's nothing stopping America from doing whatever it wants because we're the military back bone of the U.N.
-
2nd so if the U.N. is flawed, why would America want to stay with it or any other country for that matter? what makes the U.N. flawed, is the lack of checks and balances. there's nothing stopping America from doing whatever it wants because we're the military back bone of the U.N.
But you need Europe on your side, and every American knows it.
U.S. is also flawed, no country is perfect, that's why co-operation is needed.
One of the reasons why U.N. is flawed, is because U.S. is switching back and forth, taking decisions into their own hands, and doesn't co-operate properly with U.N.
A U.N. and U.S. playing on the same team could work miracles..
-
2nd so if the U.N. is flawed, why would America want to stay with it or any other country for that matter? what makes the U.N. flawed, is the lack of checks and balances. there's nothing stopping America from doing whatever it wants because we're the military back bone of the U.N.
But you need Europe on your side, and every American knows it.
U.S. is also flawed, no country is perfect, that's why co-operation is needed.
One of the reasons why U.N. is flawed, is because U.S. is switching back and forth, taking decisions into their own hands, and doesn't co-operate properly with U.N.
A U.N. and U.S. playing on the same team could work miracles..
i know alot of countries depend on other countries, there's probably thousands of important little deals that we don't know of. it's just that the U.N. is pretty muc useless, it doesn't have any power
the UN is like anti drugs ads, everyone knows taht it would be great if they worked but they just don't because there's no power behind it
-
2nd so if the U.N. is flawed, why would America want to stay with it or any other country for that matter? what makes the U.N. flawed, is the lack of checks and balances. there's nothing stopping America from doing whatever it wants because we're the military back bone of the U.N.
But you need Europe on your side, and every American knows it.
U.S. is also flawed, no country is perfect, that's why co-operation is needed.
One of the reasons why U.N. is flawed, is because U.S. is switching back and forth, taking decisions into their own hands, and doesn't co-operate properly with U.N.
A U.N. and U.S. playing on the same team could work miracles..
Side? Team?
-
i know alot of countries depend on other countries, there's probably thousands of important little deals that we don't know of. it's just that the U.N. is pretty muc useless, it doesn't have any power
the UN is like anti drugs ads, everyone knows taht it would be great if they worked but they just don't because there's no power behind it
U.N. might have little to none influence in U.S., but then again that was never U.N.'s objective, and I bet Americans don't want it neither.
U.N. have a lot of power in a lot of countries.
Side? Team?
Yes sir.
This international politic shiiiet is pretty simple..
You know about Mr. Bush's speeches so "side" and "team" should be familiar to you and yours. ;)
-
This international politic shiiiet is pretty simple..
You are joking right?
-
This international politic shiiiet is pretty simple..
You are joking right?
Yes.
But I dunno why you're tripping over "team" and "side", they're both legit words, and used often by ya boy Bush. :laugh:
-
This international politic shiiiet is pretty simple..
You are joking right?
Yes.
But I dunno why you're tripping over "team" and "side", they're both legit words, and used often by ya boy Bush. :laugh:
You got it all twisted man; it's the "axis of evil", against us, the ones who "liberate". He never said team. :P
-
You got it all twisted man; it's the "axis of evil", against us, the ones who "liberate". He never said team. :P
"The way I see it - you're either on our side..........(pause, looking in 3 different directions to convince) or the terrorists side"
Didn't he say that.. ?? :laugh: ;D
-
You got it all twisted man; it's the "axis of evil", against us, the ones who "liberate". He never said team. :P
"The way I see it - you're either on our side..........(pause, looking in 3 different directions to convince) or the terrorists side"
Didn't he say that.. ?? :laugh: ;D
Pretty much, yea. :)
I can't believe the "greatest" country has this moron for its leader. He's a fuckin bigot. You remember his "crusade" talk?