Hey limey... if possible can you get a source that is not anti-american. There is no mention of private charities, just government spending. And does that include the moneys assessed by NATO and the UN for humanitarian aid.
There are many people who give to faith based charities, the united way and the american red cross. You are hopelessly mired in your bigotry to be able to detect fact from fiction.
Your data is flawed by using a biased source that does not provide the sources of data used in its calculations. Or in other words some chimp made this up and you believe it.
2006-08-03 02:50:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Hey, it's about time we wised up! The parasites have been bleeding this country for decades, and all we've accomplished is making millionaires out of slimy dictators and corrupt governments.
As far as I'm concerned, the sooner we're out of the give-away business the better off we will be. The taxes alone are killing the average American today, so, any relief we can get in reducing that problem, the better off we will be. As inflation takes it's ugly toll, more and more Americans are finding themselves below the poverty line, and you think we should be contributing to the blackmail, you call aid?
2006-08-03 09:59:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by briang731/ bvincent 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No; as an American, I am not ashamed of those facts.
It is not the obligation of those of us in the First World to keep throwing money at the problems of the Third World.
Not much of what we've done in the past has worked well to end poverty; so why don't we try a new approach: LEAVE THE THIRD WORLD ALONE to solve their own problems!! We should stop being a bunch of interventionists and do-gooders, a la Bono.
I regularly visit certain parts of the Third World in conjunction with my job. There are PLENTY of brains and ability available there to tackle their problems. We should just get out of the way and let them do it.
2006-08-03 09:52:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by sandislandtim 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
funny we as americans have the highest dollar amount on there and hey idiot,where are the numbers for 2004,2005,2006
we contributed the most to the tsunami victims out of anyone,and oh yeah we had hurricane katrina here in the states and that was a major factor as well dont you think,shouldnt the british be ashamed they raise and breed terrorists,we as americans may not donate as much as we should but why dont you look into how much debt we have wiped out for countries in need,ummmmmmmm its somwhere in the 7 trillion dollar figure,what should we be poor so everyone else can be rich,thats pretty stupid,next time your rent is due,and you need groceries walk up and give your paycheck to a homeless person then you can gripe,idiot
2006-08-03 09:51:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by cote8377 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope, i would be in favor of a bill that would direct most of the US aid to other nations towards the US. We need to take care of our own economic and social problems before we give handouts to other nations. I'm not ashamed, I am ashamed of the government as of the past 6 years, but nontheless I rather help Americans first.
2006-08-03 09:47:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Enterrador 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
You have to include private contributions, because the US government is really limited on what it can spend. Actually, per the US Constitution, ANY spending of this type might be considered illegal.
Just because other countries have governments that are generous with OTHER PEOPLES' money, doesn't make them generous countries or governments.
2006-08-03 10:06:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, it does not.....you are looking at the percentage not the dollars.........in 2000 we were second in giving money, and in 2003 we were first, as I recall by more than 3 billion dollars.......and what other countries give is not our problem....if the countries are giving more than they should, that is not our fault, talk to those countries, then again, maybe they are giving some of the money not getting used that we have given them?
2006-08-03 09:58:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd be interested to see what would happen if our non-monetary foreign aid was valued and added to those rankings.
I'd also be interested to see who starts crying if the U.S. decides to pull all of it's foreign aid out of all the child-countries it's been babysitting.
Really, is foreign aid measured on how much you give up or how much you do?
2006-08-03 09:52:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by cirestan 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We are ashamed that the fuc-ked up wprld won't get jobs and expects us to support their lazy as-ses. We hope to give less and less money and more and more bombs burstin' in air to you sicko's. The American taxpayer is rebelling against out government giving anything to anyone. We would just as soon that a lazy man starve to death or go to work and feed himself. This goes for his 14 children too.
2006-08-03 09:52:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Should the USA do more? Probably.
Am I ashamed? NO.
Giving monies to poor nations that are busy over populating the earth is bad planing.
2006-08-03 09:53:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by mike53153 3
·
1⤊
0⤋