West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: Ant on December 20, 2004, 01:11:08 AM
-
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~kai/foreignaid.html
Surprisingly the U.S. is actually the least generous developed nation in the world. We give around .1% of national GNP away each year in foreign aid, the least of any developed nation. The U.N. decided that about .7% of GNP is a fair target.
We (americans) often brag about how much we do for the rest of the world, and while we may do the most, we do it with the least effort. I can't really say whether this is a good or bad thing, but I point it out only because many Americans have this impression that we are by far the best country in the world in every way conceivable. I'm proud of my country, but in business its important to know what your competition is doing and to benchmark yourself against them. If you blindly assume your company is superior you may one day find yourself surpassed by someone else. This is my main problem with modern day conservatives, and strong american nationalists. They go on and on about how people who criticize America hate America, while thats simply not the truth. Progress requires open eyes, and constant self criticism. I bet 100% of all Americans on this board thought we were the most generous nation in the world. It turns out we're not, and if we all continue to block out criticism we might just learn the hard way how many other assumptions we held were wrong.
As always, feel free to share your thoughts.
-
don't judge people by their country :P
No. 1 givers Bill and Melinda Gates, the world's largest international donors, who made history this year by giving their estimated $3 billion Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq:MSFT - News) dividend to their foundation. It's one of the largest donations in history by a living donor. To put it into perspective, that one gift is three times bigger than the amount that America's richest family, the descendants of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE:WMT - News) founder Sam Walton, has given during their entire lifetimes
http://biz.yahoo.com/special/charityguide04.html
-
I'm not talking about individual donations, I'm talking about foreign aid provided by the government. The world's supposed moral authority, the U.S. Government, is the least generous government in the developed world.
-
once again, governments were formed to protect the people that live within their borders, not shell out money to other people. so first, your argument has no merit
secondly the US is made up of individuals, and those individuals give alot, probably making us the most generous nation
so there goes the answer to the thread's title
Probably
-
goverments are not just for protection they have evolved from that and with the millions of deaths america has caused over the last half century, maybe they shpuld have a bit of more of a social conscience and give to those who who never harmed anyone rath invest so much money into destroying things.
the aid agency Oxfam says in a report.
In real terms, the aid budgets of rich countries are half what they were in 1960, the charity claims.
Oxfam also says that that poor countries are paying back $100m a day in debt repayments.
"As rich countries get richer, they're giving less and less. This is a scandal that must stop," Oxfam director Barbara Stocking said.
If the present trends continue, the agency warns that 45 million more children will die needlessly in the next 10 years.
Oxfam says rich countries such as the US, Germany and Japan have broken a pledge made in 1970 to make available 0.7% of their gross national incomes in aid.
-
Well technically America doesnt have to give shit to anyone, so they should be glad that were giving something.
-
Well technically America doesnt have to give shit to anyone, so they should be glad that were giving something.
-
Well technically America doesnt have to give shit to anyone, so they should be glad that were giving something.
Absolutely. 3rd World countries don't need money; they need an industrial revolution.
-
I'm not talking about individual donations, I'm talking about foreign aid provided by the government. The world's supposed moral authority, the U.S. Government, is the least generous government in the developed world.
one last thing, if i was some kid in an african dryland, smothered in flies, i could give a fuck less if the money giving me a shot, shower and a sandwich is from the american government or bill gates... no body has to give any money at all, so even a dollar is helpful
-
If you read the title of my post "Is the U.S. really the most generous nation?" you will understand that this post was not about generosity, but about misconceptions. Most people, myself included, probably felt that the U.S. was the most generous nation when in fact it is the least generous developed nation in the world. In fact in my post I said specifically:
"I can't really say whether this is a good or bad thing, but I point it out only because many Americans have this impression that we are by far the best country in the world in every way conceivable."
I'm not arguing that we should offer more AID to foreign countries. I'm only pointing out that American's have common, arrogant misconceptions about their supposed global moral leadership.
-
and how are americans the least generous when americans give the most money?
-
once again, governments were formed to protect the people that live within their borders, not shell out money to other people.
word
-
Heres what i dont get.
America started out as a poor nation, we had nothing, absolutely nothing. We progressed and became what we are today. What is stopping these other nations from doing the same.
-
Well, if you look at Canada, we're under the rader so we're tryin to cut down our donating to the rest of the world..who cares if Canada doesn't give away its money anywayz 8)
-
Well, if you look at Canada, we're under the rader so we're tryin to cut down our donating to the rest of the world..who cares if Canada doesn't give away its money anywayz 8)
as long as you keep giving us that sweet canadian bud
-
isn't this a big reason why all the terrorist groups hate America (and the whole western world)? Lots of people think that they hate 'freedom', but they've even said before that the western world needs to start spreading the wealth. It seems like we've got endless amounts of money while there are countries with people who starve every day. And to say it's not your problem is just selfish.
-
isn't this a big reason why all the terrorist groups hate America (and the whole western world)? Lots of people think that they hate 'freedom', but they've even said before that the western world needs to start spreading the wealth. It seems like we've got endless amounts of money while there are countries with people who starve every day. And to say it's not your problem is just selfish.
wrong, look at iraq.... saddam collected a nice fortune off of the ills of his people, and he was never the victim of a terrorist attack
-
and how are americans the least generous when americans give the most money?
i'm going to be nice and point out now for the 3rd time that I was refering to government sponsored foreign aid. This post has nothing to do with the amount of money U.S. citizens give away.
-
Heres what i dont get.
America started out as a poor nation, we had nothing, absolutely nothing. We progressed and became what we are today. What is stopping these other nations from doing the same.
Part of the reason is our current competitive advantage makes it impossible for them to compete, and the things they are good at we subsidize so they can't sell to us. For example, many third world countries have an absolute advantage when it comes to farming. They could sell us food and make a bundle of money, but they don't because we subsidize our farming industry. We give government hand outs to farmers so they can compete with 3rd world farmers. Also, in most industries we've developed competitive advantage to the point where they can't possibly compete without huge investments in capital, but since they are poor they cant easily afford those investments. Finally, we don't let 3rd world countries protect their markets from foreign trade. In other words, we prevent them from subsidizing their markets.
These are economic explanations for why some countries are better off than others. For a different, and more in depth, take on the issue check out Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393317552/qid=1103695302/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-5342276-9707832?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
-
Part of the reason is our current competitive advantage makes it impossible for them to compete, and the things they are good at we subsidize so they can't sell to us. For example, many third world countries have an absolute advantage when it comes to farming. They could sell us food and make a bundle of money, but they don't because we subsidize our farming industry. We give government hand outs to farmers so they can compete with 3rd world farmers. Also, in most industries we've developed competitive advantage to the point where they can't possibly compete without huge investments in capital, but since they are poor they cant easily afford those investments. Finally, we don't let 3rd world countries protect their markets from foreign trade. In other words, we prevent them from subsidizing their markets.
3rd world countries can't compeat in todays world, thats why they're 3rd world countries. the US should be helping industrialize the urban areas, not trying to improve a failing market
-
Heres what i dont get.
America started out as a poor nation, we had nothing, absolutely nothing. We progressed and became what we are today. What is stopping these other nations from doing the same.
Part of the reason is our current competitive advantage makes it impossible for them to compete, and the things they are good at we subsidize so they can't sell to us. For example, many third world countries have an absolute advantage when it comes to farming. They could sell us food and make a bundle of money, but they don't because we subsidize our farming industry. We give government hand outs to farmers so they can compete with 3rd world farmers. Also, in most industries we've developed competitive advantage to the point where they can't possibly compete without huge investments in capital, but since they are poor they cant easily afford those investments. Finally, we don't let 3rd world countries protect their markets from foreign trade. In other words, we prevent them from subsidizing their markets.
These are economic explanations for why some countries are better off than others. For a different, and more in depth, take on the issue check out Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393317552/qid=1103695302/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-5342276-9707832?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
you hit it on the head there, farming is seen as a strategic industry to a country so if we had a war we need the farmers to be able to produce our food at home, however this is becoming less and less relivant with the increased communications and supply networks around the world yet the industrialised nations still subsidise this industsry and many others (america was the leading advocate of free trade after ww2 as it missed out of trading with countries within empires as they only sold inside the empire, now there lots of free trade but america still uses protectionism on its failing industries) The EU tried to scrap the Common Agricultural Policy a couple of years ago but it was the bloody french who wouldn't allow their one of the richest countries in europe and french farmers make the most out of the CAP basically goverments pay for food to be left in a barn and rott away to keep farmers profictable but what this also does is create a culture of over producing because you know all going to get baught up and 3rd world farmers stuggle to get into many markets because they are being countries are hugely subsiding their innefficient farmers.
In this new world order we are in now britain no longer has a formal empire, but when we did we had special trading agreements where trade within the empire was always given preference and the gap between the 1st world and the 3rd world was much smaller, even after independence these we carried on until we joined the EEC where obligations to europe meant we had to place a tarrif on those countries outside of europe.
-
and how are americans the least generous when americans give the most money?
i'm going to be nice and point out now for the 3rd time that I was refering to government sponsored foreign aid. This post has nothing to do with the amount of money U.S. citizens give away.
then you should really change the title of the thread because it makes no sense, we happen to be the most generous nation no matter how many different ways you want to mix generous and nation up
-
the usa as a whole gives alot. if the government doesnt give alot than o well. we have habitat for humanity. we give alot to the red cross.alot of money. if the government doesnt give owell the population will. plus there isnt an international law that says 1st world countries have to give to 3rd world contries.
-
Well technically America doesnt have to give shit to anyone, so they should be glad that were giving something.
Absolutely. 3rd World countries don't need money; they need an industrial revolution.
You need an education
-
Well technically America doesnt have to give shit to anyone, so they should be glad that were giving something.
Absolutely. 3rd World countries don't need money; they need an industrial revolution.
You need an education
well they do need an industrial revolution. that would help them become a "developed" country
i dont see why he needs an education
-
Do you or Mauzipper have any fuckin idea what Industrial Revolution means? Or do u think its this magical process that happens as soon as a certain people become civilized, and voila...they are developed nations.
To think a series of events in Europe in the 19th century is across the board applicable in the third world today is retarded, and suggests that the person making this statement needs an education
-
no they need to start getting people to start to come in and build factories. i realize that we alredy have factories in some countries and they hacent had thier revolution. but the need factories, more factories. if they have more factories than the people who own them should reinvest the money into the community. i do realize this has a low chance of people willing to reinvest, but if that were to happen then they might have a chance. if they were to create their own industries than they will have more a chance. they do need to work harder because they missed when england and the us were having it. so there is a real small chance than they might do it.
-
no they need to start getting people to start to come in and build factories. i realize that we alredy have factories in some countries and they hacent had thier revolution. but the need factories, more factories. if they have more factories than the people who own them should reinvest the money into the community. i do realize this has a low chance of people willing to reinvest, but if that were to happen then they might have a chance. if they were to create their own industries than they will have more a chance. they do need to work harder because they missed when england and the us were having it. so there is a real small chance than they might do it.
dude, i appreciate that fact that you are at least fairly polite, but what your saying really makes very little sense. just building factories is not the answer to the third world problem. its not like we're playing Sim City, just throw in some industrial zones, and your city starts developing. i'm not going to get into the specifics on why this issue is so complicated mainly because i think my explanation would fall on def ears, but if you would like to understand the issue more a decent book is linked below:
Globalization and Its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393324397/qid=1103865149/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-5342276-9707832?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
another supposedly good book, but I haven't read is:
The Mystery of Capitalism by Hernando de Soto
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465016154/ref=pd_sim_b_4/103-5342276-9707832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance
de Soto's book has been called "a blueprint for a new industrial revolution" and his work has been highly praised by most recent republican presidents including Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I.
You can actually read the first chapter of the book here: http://www.ild.org.pe/eng/mystery_english.htm de Soto is founder and president of the ILD http://www.ild.org.pe/home.htm
-
no they need to start getting people to start to come in and build factories. i realize that we alredy have factories in some countries and they hacent had thier revolution. but the need factories, more factories. if they have more factories than the people who own them should reinvest the money into the community. i do realize this has a low chance of people willing to reinvest, but if that were to happen then they might have a chance. if they were to create their own industries than they will have more a chance. they do need to work harder because they missed when england and the us were having it. so there is a real small chance than they might do it.
dude, i appreciate that fact that you are at least fairly polite, but what your saying really makes very little sense. just building factories is not the answer to the third world problem. its not like we're playing Sim City, just throw in some industrial zones, and your city starts developing. i'm not going to get into the specifics on why this issue is so complicated mainly because i think my explanation would fall on def ears, but if you would like to understand the issue more a decent book is linked below:
Globalization and Its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393324397/qid=1103865149/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-5342276-9707832?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
another supposedly good book, but I haven't read is:
The Mystery of Capitalism by Hernando de Soto
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465016154/ref=pd_sim_b_4/103-5342276-9707832?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance
de Soto's book has been called "a blueprint for a new industrial revolution" and his work has been highly praised by most recent republican presidents including Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I.
You can actually read the first chapter of the book here: http://www.ild.org.pe/eng/mystery_english.htm de Soto is founder and president of the ILD http://www.ild.org.pe/home.htm
huh huh huh sim city's cool huh huh huh
-
i agree with ant... America sucks balls, money always affects their decisions, american govt. is the greediest in the world... they may do good for the world, but the good they do 98% of the time has double meanings, they benefit either way... FUCK U.S.A AND the individuals there... ive met 4 Americans, all arrogant fucks, iggnorant think they shit diont stick...
FUCK ALL OF U.S.A Everylast one of you, FUCK YA !!!!!!!
-
money always affects their decisions
it's called capitalism. the "american dream" is to get welthy. i'm not tryin to defend the actions of the govenment, but you need to realize that everone in a free socaity is driven to get money. people what to improve thier qulity of life. the more capital you have, the better cars, clothes, education, ect., you can get.
i'm sure money runs your world too
-
money always affects their decisions
it's called capitalism. the "american dream" is to get welthy. i'm not tryin to defend the actions of the govenment, but you need to realize that everone in a free socaity is driven to get money. people what to improve thier qulity of life. the more capital you have, the better cars, clothes, education, ect., you can get.
i'm sure money runs your world too
First, you should become able to spell words at least decently. Then we can talk about making money, alright?
-
money always affects their decisions
it's called capitalism. the "american dream" is to get welthy. i'm not tryin to defend the actions of the govenment, but you need to realize that everone in a free socaity is driven to get money. people what to improve thier qulity of life. the more capital you have, the better cars, clothes, education, ect., you can get.
i'm sure money runs your world too
First, you should become able to spell words at least decently. Then we can talk about making money, alright?
go fuck a sloth
-
money always affects their decisions
it's called capitalism. the "american dream" is to get welthy. i'm not tryin to defend the actions of the govenment, but you need to realize that everone in a free socaity is driven to get money. people what to improve thier qulity of life. the more capital you have, the better cars, clothes, education, ect., you can get.
i'm sure money runs your world too
First, you should become able to spell words at least decently. Then we can talk about making money, alright?
go fuck a sloth
You're doomed and about to be faced with ruin.
-
money always affects their decisions
it's called capitalism. the "american dream" is to get welthy. i'm not tryin to defend the actions of the govenment, but you need to realize that everone in a free socaity is driven to get money. people what to improve thier qulity of life. the more capital you have, the better cars, clothes, education, ect., you can get.
i'm sure money runs your world too
you can improve the quality of life without money.... money is only a tool to help you do it, but better relationships, social life, etc. all improve quality of life. thats another conservative dilemma. they push for increased freedom to profit, and ignore other factors that contribute to quality of life.
a cool book on this topic:
The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060005688/qid=1104116844/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-5342276-9707832?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
-
Which country is giving the most money and manpower to the victims of the Tsunamis in South Asia?
-
i agree with ant... America sucks balls, money always affects their decisions, american govt. is the greediest in the world... they may do good for the world, but the good they do 98% of the time has double meanings, they benefit either way... FUCK U.S.A AND the individuals there... ive met 4 Americans, all arrogant fucks, iggnorant think they shit diont stick...
FUCK ALL OF U.S.A Everylast one of you, FUCK YA !!!!!!!
I met a couple of hundred Americans (that's just a guess) and I can only think of 1 American I met that I don't like.
-
Which country is giving the most money and manpower to the victims of the Tsunamis in South Asia?
yep it's funny when 4 hurricanes wreck most of florida and repairs were in the billions and we didn't get a penny, but now we send $35,000,000 and the army corps of engineers and more military to help other countries fix their problems
-
Actually we didnt send $35 million and your logic is retarded. Why would less-developed countries help a wealthy country when it needs money? If Bill Gates house burns down are you going to send him a check to have it fixed?
Eventually the U.S. may pledge to give more, but last I read, the IRC asked for $7 million and we pledged around $4 millionn. In comparision to the hundreds of millions we spend each day in Iraq, its a rather insignficant amount. In comparison, George Soros, who is villified by modern republicans, personally gives away around $400 million annually to a variety of global causes.
Really though this shouldn't be all that difficult of a concept. A billionare gives away 10k annually, or a guy making 35k a year gives away 1k annually, who is more generous?
-
Actually we didnt send $35 million and your logic is retarded. Why would less-developed countries help a wealthy country when it needs money? If Bill Gates house burns down are you going to send him a check to have it fixed?
Actually we did send $35 mil and YOUR logic is retarded. What about Canada or France? Are they so "less-deleveloped" that they couldnt help us during the Hurricanes or 9/11.
The Bill Gates analogy was so stupid im not even going to comment.
Eventually the U.S. may pledge to give more, but last I read, the IRC asked for $7 million and we pledged around $4 millionn. In comparision to the hundreds of millions we spend each day in Iraq, its a rather insignficant amount. In comparison, George Soros, who is villified by modern republicans, personally gives away around $400 million annually to a variety of global causes.
What the fuck is your point about the IRC? The US is not obligated to give shit to other Countries/International Organizations. We just do because we are kind and gernerous people. And what the hell is your point about George Soros? Just because he gives money the government should?
Really though this shouldn't be all that difficult of a concept. A billionare gives away 10k annually, or a guy making 35k a year gives away 1k annually, who is more generous?
The guy who is making 35k because hes giving 2.8% of his money while the billionare is only giving 0.001% of his money.
-
Actually we didnt send $35 million and your logic is retarded. Why would less-developed countries help a wealthy country when it needs money? If Bill Gates house burns down are you going to send him a check to have it fixed?
Actually we did send $35 mil and YOUR logic is retarded. What about Canada or France? Are they so "less-deleveloped" that they couldnt help us during the Hurricanes or 9/11.
The Bill Gates analogy was so stupid im not even going to comment.
Eventually the U.S. may pledge to give more, but last I read, the IRC asked for $7 million and we pledged around $4 millionn. In comparision to the hundreds of millions we spend each day in Iraq, its a rather insignficant amount. In comparison, George Soros, who is villified by modern republicans, personally gives away around $400 million annually to a variety of global causes.
What the fuck is your point about the IRC? The US is not obligated to give shit to other Countries/International Organizations. We just do because we are kind and gernerous people. And what the hell is your point about George Soros? Just because he gives money the government should?
Really though this shouldn't be all that difficult of a concept. A billionare gives away 10k annually, or a guy making 35k a year gives away 1k annually, who is more generous?
The guy who is making 35k because hes giving 2.8% of his money while the billionare is only giving 0.001% of his money.
Actually we (Canada) helped the US with 9/11, can't remember exactly now what it was, but I remember reading about it for sure.
-
Actually we didnt send $35 million and your logic is retarded. Why would less-developed countries help a wealthy country when it needs money? If Bill Gates house burns down are you going to send him a check to have it fixed?
Actually we did send $35 mil and YOUR logic is retarded. What about Canada or France? Are they so "less-deleveloped" that they couldnt help us during the Hurricanes or 9/11.
The Bill Gates analogy was so stupid im not even going to comment.
Eventually the U.S. may pledge to give more, but last I read, the IRC asked for $7 million and we pledged around $4 millionn. In comparision to the hundreds of millions we spend each day in Iraq, its a rather insignficant amount. In comparison, George Soros, who is villified by modern republicans, personally gives away around $400 million annually to a variety of global causes.
What the fuck is your point about the IRC? The US is not obligated to give shit to other Countries/International Organizations. We just do because we are kind and gernerous people. And what the hell is your point about George Soros? Just because he gives money the government should?
Really though this shouldn't be all that difficult of a concept. A billionare gives away 10k annually, or a guy making 35k a year gives away 1k annually, who is more generous?
The guy who is making 35k because hes giving 2.8% of his money while the billionare is only giving 0.001% of his money.
Let's try again. If someone has a disaster, and they can afford to fix it, why would other people give them money to fix it? If my house burns down, and I have more than enough money to fix my house, why would my cousin, who is well off, but makes less money than me, give me money to fix my house? I'm sorry the Bill Gates analogy was too extreme for you. This one is less, now feel free to explain your logic.
Secondly, I doubled checked, and around mid-day the U.S. pledged a total of $35 million, so on that issue you are correct, when I read about the story it was only $4 million. However, we initially pledged less, and after being called stingy by the U.N., the IRC, and others, we decided to give more. In comparison, we gave billions to Florida after the hurricanes. 50,000 people just died, and whole countries got fucked, $35 million, or even $50 million is insignificant. In comparison, we spend billions everyday on Iraq. Now, I'm not really arguing that we should give more, I'm only trying to point out, that we aren't really being international saviors when we give $35 million away. If it cost a few billion to help Florida, what is 35$ million really going to do for these people?
finally, I spent this whole threat pointing out that the U.S. is the least generous nation, and after everyone disagreeing with me, you actually end up agreeing with my main point. You said, at the end, the guy who gives a higher percentage of what he makes away is more generous, well the U.S. gives away only .01% of annual GNP, the lowest of every single developed nation. Now I've never said whether generosity is good or bad, I could make an argument that it is bad, but for everyone arguing with me that the U.S. is a very generous nation, the fact is, we are the least generous nation.
-
Let's try again. If someone has a disaster, and they can afford to fix it, why would other people give them money to fix it? If my house burns down, and I have more than enough money to fix my house, why would my cousin, who is well off, but makes less money than me, give me money to fix my house? I'm sorry the Bill Gates analogy was too extreme for you. This one is less, now feel free to explain your logic.
Other countries should help us in our time of need because we always help them. Its not the matter if we can afford it or not its the matter of someone helping us because we always help them like France. We saved there ass twice and they didn't want to help us in Iraq.
Secondly, I doubled checked, and around mid-day the U.S. pledged a total of $35 million, so on that issue you are correct, when I read about the story it was only $4 million. However, we initially pledged less, and after being called stingy by the U.N., the IRC, and others, we decided to give more. In comparison, we gave billions to Florida after the hurricanes. 50,000 people just died, and whole countries got fucked, $35 million, or even $50 million is insignificant. In comparison, we spend billions everyday on Iraq. Now, I'm not really arguing that we should give more, I'm only trying to point out, that we aren't really being international saviors when we give $35 million away. If it cost a few billion to help Florida, what is 35$ million really going to do for these people?
Where not being international saviors when we give 35 million away wtf you talking about? That's the most out of any country. The US gives the most money out of all other countries combined to other countries and organizations every year. How about France they only gave $100,000 to Asia. And don't say "Oh well its because the US has the most money and greatest economy", if that's true what about Australia? They are the worlds second supplier of money and they have a small population and economy.
finally, I spent this whole threat pointing out that the U.S. is the least generous nation, and after everyone disagreeing with me, you actually end up agreeing with my main point. You said, at the end, the guy who gives a higher percentage of what he makes away is more generous, well the U.S. gives away only .01% of annual GNP, the lowest of every single developed nation. Now I've never said whether generosity is good or bad, I could make an argument that it is bad, but for everyone arguing with me that the U.S. is a very generous nation, the fact is, we are the least generous nation.
The least generous nation? Yeah okay. Fuck percentages. It doesn't matter, because we still give the greatest number of money out of everyone combined.
-
Ant: A billionare gives away 10k annually, or a guy making 35k a year gives away 1k annually, who is more generous?
Machiavelli: The guy who is making 35k because hes giving 2.8% of his money while the billionare is only giving 0.001% of his money.
Ant: You said, at the end, the guy who gives a higher percentage of what he makes away is more generous, well the U.S. gives away only .01% of annual GNP, the lowest of every single developed nation. Now I've never said whether generosity is good or bad, I could make an argument that it is bad, but for everyone arguing with me that the U.S. is a very generous nation, the fact is, we are the least generous nation.
Machiavelli: The least generous nation? Yeah okay. Fuck percentages. It doesn't matter, because we still give the greatest number of money out of everyone combined.
-
so you're saying that everyone that lost their house in Florida is well off like bill gates?
ant you're a fucking idiot when it comes to the most basic of things...you're making this big deal about generosity when you don't have the fundamental understanding of it... a dollar given to someone in need is great no matter if it's poor going to the rich or vice versa
bottom line is you're a fucking idiot and it doesn't take all the posts in this thread to prove what many of us already know
-
so you're saying that everyone that lost their house in Florida is well off like bill gates?
No. I'm saying the U.S. government could afford to give Florida a few billion to rebuild after the hurricanes. Also, Florida collected about 17 billion in insurance money. The U.S. was more than able to take care of its own problem. Why would Germany chip in say 2 million to help us rebuild florida, after Florida already recieved billions to help rebuild? It makes no sense.
-
The U.S is the most generous nation Period. Goverment aid alone we are giving 350 milliion. What about Private donations? Private Donations are 3 times the amount of government aid so when its all said and done we will be giving over 1 billion.
-
i agree with ant... America sucks balls, money always affects their decisions, american govt. is the greediest in the world... they may do good for the world, but the good they do 98% of the time has double meanings, they benefit either way... FUCK U.S.A AND the individuals there... ive met 4 Americans, all arrogant fucks, iggnorant think they shit diont stick...
FUCK ALL OF U.S.A Everylast one of you, FUCK YA !!!!!!!
I met a couple of hundred Americans (that's just a guess) and I can only think of 1 American I met that I don't like.
what he didnt let u suck his dick ?
-
i cant believe there are so many ignorant people in here. yall prolly have never visited any "3rd world country". i live in one of them, and i have been to america and other "developed countries". i studied in NY. so i know both sides.
1. govts arent only for protecting their citizens, they represent their people in the outside world, so if theyre generouse it reflects on the generosity of the people.
2. the only people criticizng the US for not being generous, is the american media. no1 affected in the recent asian disaster asked any1 for finanial aid, but many countries offered it out of generosity.
3. americans over-react when anything happens where theyre involved, but they dont give a fuck about whats happening outside, most of yall prolly had no idea what terrorism was before 9/11. so 3000 people died. peolple have been dying in east europe and asia for years, but america never gave a fuck. peple die from terrorist attacks in india every week. we dont strip and cavity search every muslim that passes through our airports.
4. americans live in a bubble...thinking yall arent a part of the world, yall think yall are the world.
5. 3rd World countries don't need money; they need an industrial revolution.
. last time i checked an industrial revolution takes money, europeans got it from plundering asian and african countries. u think ur ancestors had trees that shed money??
6. America started out as a poor nation, we had nothing, absolutely nothing. We progressed and became what we are today. What is stopping these other nations from doing the same.
. back then there was no UN, WTO. these organizations control everything...money, trade. and take a guess....which countries are on the UN security council with all the powers (US, France, Germany, Russia, UK, China). they control how trade is done. there were no rules back then...its a different time now...back then...ur ancestors invaded some1 elses country...u cant do that now and get away with it (ask saddam). the developed countries want to stay rich...even if it means keeping other countries down.
i have nothing against america, its a great place and so are the people. i know that first hand. but ur govt has done a lot of wrong that i dont think all of yall know about. and in the end the people of america are gonna pay for this. yall need to realize that THERE IS A WORLD OUTSIDE THE USA.
peace
-
Other countries should help us in our time of need because we always help them. Its not the matter if we can afford it or not its the matter of someone helping us because we always help them like France. We saved there ass twice and they didn't want to help us in Iraq.
Where not being international saviors when we give 35 million away wtf you talking about? That's the most out of any country. The US gives the most money out of all other countries combined to other countries and organizations every year. How about France they only gave $100,000 to Asia. And don't say "Oh well its because the US has the most money and greatest economy", if that's true what about Australia? They are the worlds second supplier of money and they have a small population and economy.
1. france were not against ameica...they were against the idea behind the war...as were germany...and most of the world that none of yall give a fuck about...just becoz america helpd france during the world war id doesnt mean france must support america blindly in what they do...none of yall see that the only reason UK supported the war is becoz bush has his dick up blair's ass
2. UK, china, japan all donated more than 35 mn. and like ant has said thats not what this thread is about.
peace
-
i cant believe there are so many ignorant people in here. yall prolly have never visited any "3rd world country". i live in one of them, and i have been to america and other "developed countries". i studied in NY. so i know both sides.
1. govts arent only for protecting their citizens, they represent their people in the outside world, so if theyre generouse it reflects on the generosity of the people.
2. the only people criticizng the US for not being generous, is the american media. no1 affected in the recent asian disaster asked any1 for finanial aid, but many countries offered it out of generosity.
3. americans over-react when anything happens where theyre involved, but they dont give a fuck about whats happening outside, most of yall prolly had no idea what terrorism was before 9/11. so 3000 people died. peolple have been dying in east europe and asia for years, but america never gave a fuck. peple die from terrorist attacks in india every week. we dont strip and cavity search every muslim that passes through our airports.
4. americans live in a bubble...thinking yall arent a part of the world, yall think yall are the world.
5. 3rd World countries don't need money; they need an industrial revolution.
. last time i checked an industrial revolution takes money, europeans got it from plundering asian and african countries. u think ur ancestors had trees that shed money??
6. America started out as a poor nation, we had nothing, absolutely nothing. We progressed and became what we are today. What is stopping these other nations from doing the same.
. back then there was no UN, WTO. these organizations control everything...money, trade. and take a guess....which countries are on the UN security council with all the powers (US, France, Germany, Russia, UK, China). they control how trade is done. there were no rules back then...its a different time now...back then...ur ancestors invaded some1 elses country...u cant do that now and get away with it (ask saddam). the developed countries want to stay rich...even if it means keeping other countries down.
i have nothing against america, its a great place and so are the people. i know that first hand. but ur govt has done a lot of wrong that i dont think all of yall know about. and in the end the people of america are gonna pay for this. yall need to realize that THERE IS A WORLD OUTSIDE THE USA.
peace
words of wisdom
-
You guys talk as if America HAS to give money to third world countries, and other countries in need. Any country that gives anything is generous.
America gives lots of money to other countries, and we obviously dont get anything of value in return, so therefore we are generous enough said.
-
Other countries should help us in our time of need because we always help them. Its not the matter if we can afford it or not its the matter of someone helping us because we always help them like France. We saved there ass twice and they didn't want to help us in Iraq.
Where not being international saviors when we give 35 million away wtf you talking about? That's the most out of any country. The US gives the most money out of all other countries combined to other countries and organizations every year. How about France they only gave $100,000 to Asia. And don't say "Oh well its because the US has the most money and greatest economy", if that's true what about Australia? They are the worlds second supplier of money and they have a small population and economy.
MAchiavelli no offence its prolly not ure fault ure the dumbest most ignorant dillusional cliche american... FUCK YOU thats the stupidest comment i have EVER heard.... America wouldnt have helped europe in WW2 if Japan didnt attack and cripple pearl harbor, its all about the money when america is involved... FUCK YOU america didnt wanna get involved in WW2 they thought it was europe problem, when they were attacked they made it their problem, and when the war was over they killed millions by kicking japan in the nuts... America is the nation that is the most dangerous with weapons of mass destruction, because theyre the only irresponsible nation that used one on innocent people, when a war was already over... FUCK AMERICA YOU ALL DESERVE TO DIE !!!!!!!!!!!!
I sincerily hope your house is bombed by terrorists.
-
You guys talk as if America HAS to give money to third world countries, and other countries in need. Any country that gives anything is generous.
America gives lots of money to other countries, and we obviously dont get anything of value in return, so therefore we are generous enough said.
and youre talking as though america has the right to be greedy, do you think only u as an american deserves a good life ?? FUCK OUT OF HERE DIE BITCH
-
I sincerily hope your house is bombed by terrorists.
LMAO...thats nothing to joke about
peace
-
I sincerily hope your house is bombed by terrorists.
LMAO...thats nothing to joke about
i assure you i wasnt joking. i hate americans.
edit: i dont know if i hate the american individual, but i definetly hate america and what it represents... fuck the star spangled banner.
-
MAchiavelli no offence its prolly not ure fault ure the dumbest most ignorant dillusional cliche american... FUCK YOU thats the stupidest comment i have EVER heard.... America wouldnt have helped europe in WW2 if Japan didnt attack and cripple pearl harbor, its all about the money when america is involved... FUCK YOU america didnt wanna get involved in WW2 they thought it was europe problem, when they were attacked they made it their problem, and when the war was over they killed millions by kicking japan in the nuts... America is the nation that is the most dangerous with weapons of mass destruction, because theyre the only irresponsible nation that used one on innocent people, when a war was already over... FUCK AMERICA YOU ALL DESERVE TO DIE !!!!!!!!!!!!
I sincerily hope your house is bombed by terrorists.
Wow your a moron.
You are just jealous that America is the richest and most powerful nation on earth, and you wish that your country was just like us but their not, so you hate and bitch about us cuz you have nothing else to do.
-
i see my karma went down two points since i posted in this thread. if yall got summ to say...say it :sshh:
peace
-
Wow your a moron thats just jealous that America is the richest and most powerful nation on earth and you wish that your country was just like us, so you hate and bitch about us.
like spidermans deceased uncle once said......with great power comes great responisibilty
peace
-
MAchiavelli no offence its prolly not ure fault ure the dumbest most ignorant dillusional cliche american... FUCK YOU thats the stupidest comment i have EVER heard.... America wouldnt have helped europe in WW2 if Japan didnt attack and cripple pearl harbor, its all about the money when america is involved... FUCK YOU america didnt wanna get involved in WW2 they thought it was europe problem, when they were attacked they made it their problem, and when the war was over they killed millions by kicking japan in the nuts... America is the nation that is the most dangerous with weapons of mass destruction, because theyre the only irresponsible nation that used one on innocent people, when a war was already over... FUCK AMERICA YOU ALL DESERVE TO DIE !!!!!!!!!!!!
I sincerily hope your house is bombed by terrorists.
Wow your a moron.
You are just jealous that America is the richest and most powerful nation on earth, and you wish that your country was just like us but their not, so you hate and bitch about us cuz you have nothing else to do. I'll now go back to eating dick.
shit man, you really hit the nail on the head, im jelous... :loser:
-
You guys talk as if America HAS to give money to third world countries, and other countries in need. Any country that gives anything is generous.
America gives lots of money to other countries, and we obviously dont get anything of value in return, so therefore we are generous enough said.
and youre talking as though america has the right to be greedy, do you think only u as an american deserves a good life ?? FUCK OUT OF HERE DIE BITCH
Once again the "Right" to be greedy?
America made its money and we have the "RIGHT" to do with it however the fuck we want. We have the right to choose to aid other countries and the right to not aid other countries. We choose to aid them.
-
last i saw America's currency has written on it "in God we trust", if this is the case America as a nation should uphold God's Law... if you do not know god's law then you should dust off the old bible and read about it.
-
last i saw America's currency has written on it "in God we trust", if this is the case America as a nation should uphold God's Law... if you do not know god's law then you should dust off the old bible and read about it.
Have you been living in a cave? America was founded on God, and last time i checked things have changed since then.
But that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic
-
The U.S is the most generous nation Period. Goverment aid alone we are giving 350 milliion. What about Private donations? Private Donations are 3 times the amount of government aid so when its all said and done we will be giving over 1 billion.
WOW.
Amazing. :-X
-
Reading this thread makes me feel like I'm back in my school history class.
Although I was a classroom assistant at a special needs school.
Here's some stats for you morons, and remember: this was before the tsunami.
International giving by U.S. foundations totals $1.5 billion per year
Charitable giving by U.S. businesses now comes to at least $2.8 billion annually
American NGOs gave over $6.6 billion in grants, goods and volunteers.
Religious overseas ministries contribute $3.4 billion, including health care, literacy training, relief and development.
$1.3 billion by U.S. colleges are given in scholarships to foreign students
Personal remittances from the U.S. to developing countries came to $18 billion in 2000
Source: Dr. Carol Laderman - Aid and Comfort
-
fuck the star spangled banner.
and fuck you too
-
Other countries should help us in our time of need because we always help them. Its not the matter if we can afford it or not its the matter of someone helping us because we always help them like France. We saved there ass twice and they didn't want to help us in Iraq.
Where not being international saviors when we give 35 million away wtf you talking about? That's the most out of any country. The US gives the most money out of all other countries combined to other countries and organizations every year. How about France they only gave $100,000 to Asia. And don't say "Oh well its because the US has the most money and greatest economy", if that's true what about Australia? They are the worlds second supplier of money and they have a small population and economy.
MAchiavelli no offence its prolly not ure fault ure the dumbest most ignorant dillusional cliche american... FUCK YOU thats the stupidest comment i have EVER heard.... America wouldnt have helped europe in WW2 if Japan didnt attack and cripple pearl harbor, its all about the money when america is involved... FUCK YOU america didnt wanna get involved in WW2 they thought it was europe problem, when they were attacked they made it their problem, and when the war was over they killed millions by kicking japan in the nuts... America is the nation that is the most dangerous with weapons of mass destruction, because theyre the only irresponsible nation that used one on innocent people, when a war was already over... FUCK AMERICA YOU ALL DESERVE TO DIE !!!!!!!!!!!!
I sincerily hope your house is bombed by terrorists.
your an ass hole
talkin shit about america on a west coast rap forum ::)
-
8)
-
wtf happened to my 2 posts and 7evens posts
-
they made no sense so i had them removed ;D
peace
-
Reading this thread makes me feel like I'm back in my school history class.
Although I was a classroom assistant at a special needs school.
Here's some stats for you morons, and remember: this was before the tsunami.
International giving by U.S. foundations totals $1.5 billion per year
Charitable giving by U.S. businesses now comes to at least $2.8 billion annually
American NGOs gave over $6.6 billion in grants, goods and volunteers.
Religious overseas ministries contribute $3.4 billion, including health care, literacy training, relief and development.
$1.3 billion by U.S. colleges are given in scholarships to foreign students
Personal remittances from the U.S. to developing countries came to $18 billion in 2000
Source: Dr. Carol Laderman - Aid and Comfort
I'm glad you took your history classes, but you should have paid attention in mathematics as well. Generosity by definition is a relative concept and this post was specifically about U.S. government aid.
You sound just as dumb as your fellow republicans on this board when you continue to argue against an arguement I haven't made. I could make an argument that foreign aid is actually a bad thing, but I never said whether it was good or bad, I just pointed out correctly, that the U.S. government is the least generous government in the developed world. It gives a smaller percentage of its annual GNP than any other developed nation. If you can't look at an obvious fact and admit its existence, you shouldn't bother arguing with me. Arguing ignorance all day doesn't make your party stronger it makes it weaker. Maybe if the republican party was filled with more individuals with the courage to see error, and admit the truth, it would be a more respected party. But as it stands today, American Republicans are the least respected political party in the world today. I wonder why?
-
I'm glad you took your history classes, but you should have paid attention in mathematics as well. Generosity by definition is a relative concept and this post was specifically about U.S. government aid.
You sound just as dumb as your fellow republicans on this board when you continue to argue against an arguement I haven't made. I could make an argument that foreign aid is actually a bad thing, but I never said whether it was good or bad, I just pointed out correctly, that the U.S. government is the least generous government in the developed world. It gives a smaller percentage of its annual GNP than any other developed nation. If you can't look at an obvious fact and admit its existence, you shouldn't bother arguing with me. Arguing ignorance all day doesn't make your party stronger it makes it weaker. Maybe if the republican party was filled with more individuals with the courage to see error, and admit the truth, it would be a more respected party. But as it stands today, American Republicans are the least respected political party in the world today. I wonder why?
This whole thread you said US and America not US government or American government.
Fuck GNP...we give the most money so it doesnt matter.
-
Taken from my 2nd post:
I'm not talking about individual donations, I'm talking about foreign aid provided by the government. The world's supposed moral authority, the U.S. Government, is the least generous government in the developed world.
In my original post I referred specifically to U.S. foreign aid, which I can understand could be misunderstood. But foreign aid typically refers to government aid. I also referenced in my original posts, a site showing stastics on foreign aid by national governments. Either way, as you can see from the above quote, while I can understand being misunderstood, I clarified my position so it could be clearly undestood in my second post. So don't tell me I spent this whole thread saying otherwise. Thats why your arguments don't make sense. Because you reinvent other people's positions for them, and then argue against things they never even said. Its slowly becoming the typical republican form of argument. You saw Bush do it continually in the debates, and as i've said before, values emanate from the top down.
Also, you said in your own words, your more generous if you give a higher percentage of your income. Now I've pointed this out to you twice now, and you just say, fuck that we give the most. And you wonder why republicans frequently are branded as being ignorant.
-
ant i still see you're a moron.... you questioned if america was the most generous nation and we are..
once again, i bet a poor starving african doesn't care if his next sandwich comes from gary smith living in butt fuck iowa or from george bush
only an idiot like you would argue a point like that and you didn't even argue it good, you came up with one number, woodrow and i proved that was false and now you change your argument saying that we should give more than the 75% of the worlds donations...give it up, you lost
-
ant i still see you're a moron.... you questioned if america was the most generous nation and we are..
once again, i bet a poor starving african doesn't care if his next sandwich comes from gary smith living in butt fuck iowa or from george bush
only an idiot like you would argue a point like that and you didn't even argue it good, you came up with one number, woodrow and i proved that was false and now you change your argument saying that we should give more than the 75% of the worlds donations...give it up, you lost
no moron you lost. enjoy your dead end job, its a sign of your stupidity. if you arent going to recognize reality i'm not going to bother discussing things with you politely.
-
ant i still see you're a moron.... you questioned if america was the most generous nation and we are..
once again, i bet a poor starving african doesn't care if his next sandwich comes from gary smith living in butt fuck iowa or from george bush
only an idiot like you would argue a point like that and you didn't even argue it good, you came up with one number, woodrow and i proved that was false and now you change your argument saying that we should give more than the 75% of the worlds donations...give it up, you lost
no moron you lost. enjoy your dead end job, its a sign of your stupidity. if you arent going to recognize reality i'm not going to bother discussing things with you politely.
you can't discuss what you've already lost...you don't get that you're wrong and that you are stupid, that is THE reality and once again i'm living comfortable so youe weak ass attacks on me won't hurt...how does it feel to be a shallow spoon fed faggot that never made anything of himself and had to rely on daddy's money? word of advice, get off the computer and get yourself some ass....your arguing is growing stagnant
-
no moron you lost. enjoy your dead end job, its a sign of your stupidity. if you arent going to recognize reality i'm not going to bother discussing things with you politely.
Everything he said was true.
The only argument you can make is that the US government gives the smallest percentage of its annual GDP then any other developed nation. Which is a stupid argument becuase its the most money out of any country in the world combined.
-
Surprisingly the U.S. is actually the least generous developed nation in the world. We give around .1% of national GNP away each year in foreign aid, the least of any developed nation. The U.N. decided that about .7% of GNP is a fair target.
We (americans) often brag about how much we do for the rest of the world, and while we may do the most, we do it with the least effort. I can't really say whether this is a good or bad thing, but I point it out only because many Americans have this impression that we are by far the best country in the world in every way conceivable. I'm proud of my country, but in business its important to know what your competition is doing and to benchmark yourself against them. If you blindly assume your company is superior you may one day find yourself surpassed by someone else. This is my main problem with modern day conservatives, and strong american nationalists. They go on and on about how people who criticize America hate America, while thats simply not the truth. Progress requires open eyes, and constant self criticism. I bet 100% of all Americans on this board thought we were the most generous nation in the world. It turns out we're not, and if we all continue to block out criticism we might just learn the hard way how many other assumptions we held were wrong.
As always, feel free to share your thoughts.
-
International giving by U.S. foundations totals $1.5 billion per year
Charitable giving by U.S. businesses now comes to at least $2.8 billion annually
American NGOs gave over $6.6 billion in grants, goods and volunteers.
Religious overseas ministries contribute $3.4 billion, including health care, literacy training, relief and development.
$1.3 billion by U.S. colleges are given in scholarships to foreign students
Personal remittances from the U.S. to developing countries came to $18 billion in 2000
Source: Dr. Carol Laderman - Aid and Comfort
-
Bigger font doesn't make your argument stronger.
Given that I referenced specifically government sponsored foreign aid, but you insist on talking about donations from U.S. citizens, I'll give you a litle extra information.
1. Just as a reminder. I clarfied in my second post I was specifically referencing U.S. government foreign aid, and the statistics I cited in my first post referenced U.S. government aid, so that should have been clear.
2. Coincidentally a column in today's NY Times addressed your argument:
In 2003, the latest year for which figures are available, we increased such assistance by one-fifth, for President Bush has actually been much better about helping poor countries than President Clinton was. But as a share of our economy, our contribution still left us ranked dead last among 22 top donor countries.
We gave 15 cents for every $100 of national income to poor countries. Denmark gave 84 cents, the Netherlands gave 80 cents, Belgium gave 60 cents, France gave 41 cents, and Greece gave 21 cents (that was the lowest share, beside our own).
It is sometimes said that Americans make up for low official aid with private charitable donations. Nope. By OECD calculations, private donations add 6 cents a day to the official U.S. figure - meaning that we still give only 21 cents a day per person.
-
^wow ny times
-
Thats crazy! I didn't realize 2.2% (241 Billion) of our GDP was the least of any developed country?
http://www.aafrc.org/press_releases/trustreleases/americansgive.html
-
Thats crazy! I didn't realize 2.2% (241 Billion) of our GDP was the least of any developed country?
http://www.aafrc.org/press_releases/trustreleases/americansgive.html
Are you retarded? This whole post is about government sponsored foreign aid, and first you changed topics by citing citizen sponsored foreign aid, now your citing citizen sponsored charitable contributions in general. That 241 billion you cited is made up of charitable contributions to organizations WITHIN the United States. Why you think that applies to this argument is beyond me. You are comparing apples to oranges.
-
^wow ny times
No actuallly that stastic is from the OECD, or Organization of Economic Co-Operation and Development. Ad Hominem attacks don't disprove anything, all they prove is your an idiot.
To learn more about the OECD go here:
http://www.oecd.org/home/
-
Ant i got respect for ya man, are you American ? if so the first living American i respect, u and dj quik...
-
Are you retarded? This whole post is about government sponsored foreign aid, and first you changed topics by citing citizen sponsored foreign aid, now your citing citizen sponsored charitable contributions in general. That 241 billion you cited is made up of charitable contributions to organizations WITHIN the United States. Why you think that applies to this argument is beyond me. You are comparing apples to oranges.
You are the biggest moron on this board. Hands down.
First you complain about the government spending TOO much money in other posts, now you're claiming they don't spend enough? Which is it? Why should the government give out aid when it's clear that our private citizens do a much better job at it?
-
(http://www.wcmixtapes.com/class.jpg)
-
Are you retarded? This whole post is about government sponsored foreign aid, and first you changed topics by citing citizen sponsored foreign aid, now your citing citizen sponsored charitable contributions in general. That 241 billion you cited is made up of charitable contributions to organizations WITHIN the United States. Why you think that applies to this argument is beyond me. You are comparing apples to oranges.
You are the biggest moron on this board. Hands down.
First you complain about the government spending TOO much money in other posts, now you're claiming they don't spend enough? Which is it? Why should the government give out aid when it's clear that our private citizens do a much better job at it?
Again your making up arguments I've never made. I said previously I could argue giving aid is a bad thing.. I was only pointing out a common misconception. You were the one that prominently reposted my initial post in large font. If you read it you would have seen I never complained that we don't give a lot and actually said the opposite. In fact I was explicit that this post was primarily about pointing out misconceptions. Now, I've caught you about three times in this post saying things that were not correct, of course your arrogance prevents you from admitting you could possibly be wrong.
-
(http://www.wcmixtapes.com/class.jpg)
fuck
-
^ LMAO @ that pic...
Why is Tech listed twice? Cloning gone wrong?
-
^ LMAO @ that pic...
Why is Tech listed twice? Cloning gone wrong?
He's just that retarded.
-
^ LMAO @ that pic...
Why is Tech listed twice? Cloning gone wrong?
He's just that retarded.
can't argue about that
-
LMAO @ that pic, Engel bringing the comedy once again. ;D
-
Your pictures always make me laugh.
-
^ LMAO @ that pic...
Why is Tech listed twice? Cloning gone wrong?
He's just that retarded.
can't argue about that
You have no room to talk dildo-rider
-
I don't wear glasses :)
-
I don't wear glasses :)
So, you recently got contacts? LOL
-
hey is Woodrow Englewood ?
-
hey is Woodrow Englewood ?
Yes
-
everything is falling into place....
Look i agree with Ant coz he's an American that looks at two sides, i dont see why all of you are gangin up on him when he is just showing you simple facts, its all on blue & white, are all of u just so retarded and proud that u cant admit that ure country isnt the best ? you cant argue with facts, u could gang up on me coz i dont have the facts, but u cannot seriously, or logically deny his argument...
-
Ant i got respect for ya man, are you American ? if so the first living American i respect, u and dj quik...
LMAO
peace
-
Well technically America doesnt have to give shit to anyone, so they should be glad that were giving something.
Yep! I heard people bitching a few days ago about Bill Gates only giving like $100 million to charity. They said he makes so much money, that he can afford to give more....Well shit, he doesn't have to give anything!
-
everything is falling into place....
Look i agree with Ant coz he's an American that looks at two sides, i dont see why all of you are gangin up on him when he is just showing you simple facts, its all on blue & white, are all of u just so retarded and proud that u cant admit that ure country isnt the best ? you cant argue with facts, u could gang up on me coz i dont have the facts, but u cannot seriously, or logically deny his argument...
yeh no shit, what he said :sign_werd:
-
Ah, facts can be used to prove anything
-
forfty percent of people say that....
-
gotta give props to Ant for talking real shit..
i cant believe how ignorant some members here in dubcc are
-
gotta give props to Ant for talking real shit..
i cant believe how ignorant some members here in dubcc are
he is talking real shit... he has yet to produce any evidence of america not being the most generous nation...
his whole argument boils down to shit
-
his whole argument boils down to shit
and we all know what boiled shit is like.
what? just me? Oh Well
-
once again, governments were formed to protect the people that live within their borders, not shell out money to other people. so first, your argument has no merit
secondly the US is made up of individuals, and those individuals give alot, probably making us the most generous nation
so there goes the answer to the thread's title
Probably
Nicely said
-
no
-
my turn to join in i been away. american goverment is very stingy in aid and most things that don't concern them, however the private institutions and citizens may pladge alot but you would hope that from the richest country with a population of 300 million or whatever it is. i will congratualte them for sending the marines to help out i hope our goverment will follow suit and this is the time to act we are doing some in that area but not enough. after a slow start our government have pledged a good amount of money.
to see whose sent what read below.
Tsunami aid: Who's giving what
Donations have been pouring in from governments and individuals in the wake of the Asian tsunami disaster. The UN says it has received between US$3-4bn (£1.6-2.1bn) in pledges and has called for $1bn in cash to be released immediately.
Here is a breakdown of what has been pledged so far:
Germany - $1.1bn
Berlin has raised its government aid to $674m. Germany is also sending a mobile hospital to Aceh and a military ship with two helicopters, aid supplies, water treatment equipment and an operating theatre on board. The public has donated an estimated $431m.
IMF - $1bn
The IMF has offered up to $1bn in financial assistance to afflicted countries.
Australia - $903m
The government has raised its offer of aid to $815 million over a five-year period. Half of this sum is in bilateral loans. Prime Minister, John Howard has been sceptical about supporting the debt relief initiative being pushed by other wealthy countries. Donations from the Australian public total $88m. About 350 military staff, four military helicopters, a troop transport ship, a military health support team and a water purification plant are being sent to Indonesia, as well as a team of volunteer medical professionals.
European Union - $628m
$628 million in reconstruction and humanitarian funds, of which $130m is humanitarian aid. This brings the total sum donated by the bloc (EC+ EU member states) to roughly $2bn.
US - $550m
$350m in government donations, plus military assistance involving 12,600 personnel, 21 ships, 14 cargo planes and more than 90 helicopters. Around $200m of private donations are also pouring in, with $120m donated to the US branches of the Red Cross, Oxfam and Save the Children, and to Catholic Relief Services.
Japan - $500m
$500m (£264m) in government donations, half of which Tokyo has promised to make available immediately in direct grants. Some 120 civilian emergency workers were sent to tsunami-hit countries. The government has also offered to help set up a tsunami early warning system in the Indian Ocean.
FROM THE WORLD'S POOREST
Russian town of Beslan - scene of a bloody school siege last year - pledged 1m roubles ($36,000) from the fund set up after the mass hostage-taking
Mozambique - one of the world's poorest nations - has donated $100,000
Nepal and East Timor have also pledged donations
Britain - $285m
$96m in government donations, plus $189m in private donations which the government has pledged to match. Two RAF planes, a C-17 and a Tristar, are helping to deliver aid to the region. Tony Blair has also offered to send 120 Ghurkas to Indonesia but this was rejected by Jakarta. Chancellor Gordon Brown is pushing a proposal for the debts of the affected nations to be frozen.
World Bank - $250m
The banks has diverted $250m from existing programmes to cover emergency needs while longer-term reconstruction needs are assessed.
Norway - $212m
Pledged $182m in government donations, plus $30m raised in private donations.
Asian Development Bank - $175m
An amount of $175m has been diverted from existing programmes in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. The bank says up to $150m more could be made available in new loans.
Sweden - $140m
Pledged $80m in government donations, plus $60m in private donations, including money raised during two telethons.
Italy - $115m
Donated $95m in government aid. Six to eight police forensics specialists have been sent to Thailand to help to identify bodies. Public donations totalling $20m had been collected by New Year's Day.
France - $115m
Pledged $66m in government donations, plus an estimated $49m raised in private donations. A medical team has been sent to Sri Lanka.
Canada - $348m
Prime Minister Paul Martin announced a five-fold increase in initial Canadian pledges, with a package worth almost $350m over five years. Private donations have so far reached $123m, the prime minister added.
Canada is deploying its highly-specialised Disaster Assistance Response Team to Sri Lanka.
Denmark - $75m
Some $75m in government aid. Copenhagen has sent a field hospital, transport vehicles and a ship to the UN aid effort, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen has said.
Netherlands - $69m
Donated $34m by the government and aid groups say a further $35m has been raised in private donations. A Dutch police identification team has been sent to Thailand.
Spain - $68m
Given $68m in government donations, and a medical team has been sent to Sri Lanka.
China - $65.1m
Pledged$63.1m in government donations, plus $1.8m donated to the Chinese Red Cross.
South Korea - $63m
Pledged $50m in government aid. The prime minister's office said the funds would be spend for rehabilitation of the devastated areas over the next three years. Private donations have reached nearly $13m, the South Korean foreign ministry says.
Qatar - £25m
Has given $25m in government aid. Qatar is also sending food, medical and logistical supplies to affected countries.
Russia - $2m
Around $2m in aid but the government is sending additional aid, including grain and water purifiers.
North Korea
North Korea has pledged $150,000 to aid the effort in Indonesia.
Countries in the region
India
The Indian military is staging its biggest relief operation ever in Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Indonesia. This involves at least 16,000 troops, 32 navy ships, 41 aircraft including at least 16 helicopters, several medical teams and a mobile hospital. The air force has so far lifted 10,000 tonnes of relief supplies.
Bangladesh
Bangladesh has dispatched 111 soldiers to Sri Lanka and the Maldives, with a further 46 expected to join them. Two planes and two helicopters will carry the troops together with aid supplies.
Pakistan
Pakistan plans to send 500 military staff in medical and engineering teams to Indonesia and Sri Lanka.
Afghanistan
Afghanistan has pledged to send around a dozen medics and a planeload of medicine and equipment to India and Sri Lanka. Citizens have also donated blood.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4145259.stm
Nations meet UN swift cash appeal
The UN official co-ordinating aid for tsunami survivors has said concrete commitments worth $717m (£382m) have been secured from donor countries.
Speaking after an international meeting in Geneva, Jan Egeland said he was very encouraged by the swift response.
He said the governments had promised to release the cash to help the disaster victims over the next six months.
But he also warned that donor nations must not neglect other humanitarian crises around the world.
Mr Egeland said it was the first time the UN had collected so much money in such a short space of time after a disaster, calling it an "extraordinary effort".
Urgent aid
Japan, the biggest donor, is to contribute $250m (£133m) in cash within the next few days, he said, half the total pledge already made by the Japanese government.
Mr Egeland had earlier urged donor countries to release funds more quickly for the relief effort, saying only one-tenth of aid promised had so far been received.
In other developments in the Indian Ocean region:
The Indonesian army tells foreign aid workers in Aceh to register to travel outside Banda Aceh and Meulaboh
Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga wants to adopt a Tamil child orphaned by the tsunami as a gesture of goodwill towards the Tamil community, an aide says
An Acehnese man is rescued by an Arab container ship after two weeks drifting at sea following the tsunami
International police agency Interpol sets up what is thought to be the biggest disaster victim identification centre in history, in the Thai resort of Phuket.
Tuesday's Geneva meeting came five days after UN Secretary General Kofi Annan chaired a donor conference in Jakarta, Indonesia, where he issued a call for urgent aid.
Massive effort
The amount now promised over the next six months is equivalent to 73% of the $977m (£520m) that Mr Annan requested.
We're seeing humanity at its very best in the beginning of 2005
Jan Egeland
UN relief co-ordinator
Watch all of Jan Egeland's briefing
The delegates, representing governments and aid agencies, included US aid chief Andrew Natsios, EU development commissioner Louis Michel and senior ministers from Britain, France and Germany.
Mr Egeland, who chaired the 81-nation meeting, said as it opened that about $300m had been committed to projects on the ground in the tsunami-hit region, out of $3.4bn in formally recorded aid pledges.
"We need very quickly more signed contracts, more cash, more concrete commitments to help keep this massive effort going in the next six months," he said.
But he said that the outbreak of disease and starvation that the UN had feared in the wake of the tsunami disaster, in which more than 150,000 people died, did not seem to be happening.
Yearly shortfall
The UN co-ordinator listed at least a dozen regions where UN agencies are struggling to meet the basic needs of millions of people.
He pointed out that the Democratic Republic of Congo, where 1,000 people die daily of preventable diseases or because of the conflict there, suffered the equivalent of a tsunami every five months.
Each year, Mr Egeland said, the UN launches an appeal for aid work but actual funds always fall well short of pledges.
Phil Bloomer, head of UK-based charity Oxfam, said this was "crunch time" to make sure the pledges were realised.
"This is not the time for empty rhetoric," he said, quoted by AFP news agency. "The eyes of the world are on this meeting and we want guarantees that the aid will not be diverted from other disasters and other suffering people."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4163655.stm