It's high time the US re-evaluates the freebies

[GAMEFACE]

we hand out. The US hands out 10X's the amount of cash than all other countries combined. Then these countries that have their hand out turn around and make things difficult on the US. When there's a problem in the world it's the US that responds, not the UN or any other country. When Bush wins again I pray he cuts off all the countries that have sided with our enemies. Would you give a hand to a person that hates you and tries to make your life hell? NO, you wouldn't. This shits going to come to a end one day, the taxpayers have had it.

Bush wins easy.

 

[xpanda]

"In 2002, total aid flows from rich countries to poor ones reached $58 billion ... U.S. government aid in 2002 was $13.3 billion, or 13 cents a day per U.S. citizen."

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2540&page=1

Your statement that the US gave ten times more than the rest of the world combined is not true, as it is clear that the rest of the world did not donate a mere $1.3 Billion in 2002.

Do you not find it interesting that while you complain about how much money the US spends on all these ungrateful nations, that the total amount the US spent on aid in 2002 is less than 15% the amount so far spent on the war in Iraq? Maybe the high cost of nation-building is what your taxpayers will reject ...

 

[Oceans11]

These 3rd world countries pay WAY more back to the Western banking system than those pissy handouts they receive.

I agree, the US should stop 'giving' them money.
Keep it and Stuff it up yer azz.
In return, the 3rd world should stop all debt repayments to the West and start ploughing it back into their own societies.

The poorest owe about $250 billion.
At 4% thats about $10 billion p.a.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1050938.stm

...and thats just the very poorest places...

[This message was edited by eek on July 14, 2004 at 01:45 PM.]

 

[xpanda]

No serious discussion can be had about aid to third-world countries without discussing the imbalanced trade practices that us Westerners engage in with them. I am beginning to think that international aid is specifically designed to keep these countries at our doorsteps and unempowered so that we can maintain our lopsided relationship with them. Our systematic loan/privatisation schemes are making the situation worse for those countries who have not developed a strong infrastructure to fall back on when we rape them. It's charming, really.

We need to stop freaking out about outsourcing, stop subsidising our industries, and start importing from these countries. Everyone will benefit and threads like this won't be tainted with quite the same stench of inhumanity.

 

[GAMEFACE]

Good! When we cut them off they shouldn't whine like a bunch of babies. Get real we fund the UN, we have bases around the world that should be closed, however, the host countries LOVE the cash we pay to be there and the jobs created along with money the troops spend. The hand outs are never enough, give me, give me, give me. Enough is a fukin enough.

 

[Marco]

What ever happened to sovereign nations taking care of thier own problems?

What foreign aid did the US receive after the WTC buildings were leveled on 9/11....????

Yet we still find money to send out after taking a massive hit like that?

GAMEFACE.....I'm a little confused, maybe you could clear something up....When you say that the taxpayers are fed up, and that Bush wins easy......don't these two kinda contradict each other considering Bush's propensity to shovel billions of dollars into the Iraqi situation? Wouldn't and shouldn't the taxpayers be fed up with that alone?

 

[jointpleasures]

Marco,
question:
If the roof of your house leaked water every time it rained, would you put a bucket on the floor to catch the water before it hit the floor?



That won't solve the problem.

I'd shell out the extra bucks it may cost to repair that roof, or maybe even 'rebuild' that roof.


It really rained hard on 9/11 and a tough lesson was learned.

It rained hard a few times before 9/11 as well but Clinton used the bucket.

 

[xpanda]

Except your contractor fücked it all up and went and fixed your neighbour's roof, which wasn't leaking yet. Funny, too, that you still get the bill.

 

[GAMEFACE]

Marco,

I hate that we have to spend all this money over in Iraq. The problem is if we continue to ignore the problem we had with saddam and the terrorist they would evetually hit us with a nuke in a major city. The cost of that would be 1 zillion dollars, so we have no choice but to act over there. I don't want to send a dime to the countries that opposed the US.

When we get Iraq squared away the other problem countries will fall into line. I believe this is what Bush is counting on. We've seen Lybia sing a different tune lately and North Korea has also stopped making demands.

After the election look for Iran and Syria to see the light. Things are going much better than the liberal media is reporting.

 

[jointpleasures]

I'm confused still a bit on how the conservative party gained seats in the most recent election in Canada, but how the liberals won the election. I know it's just Canada and I probably shouldn't even care, but what's that all about?

My neighbors to the east, south, and west deserved those roofs

 

[xpanda]

JP: I'm not sure what you're asking me. Could you elaborate?

 

[jointpleasures]

Oh, its nothing, really. I don't even know if you have senators up there. I must calm down now and gets some work done, good day x.

 

[WildBill]

It is a stupid system. A lot of the aid we send we could withhold and cause no trouble to if we stopped paying our farmers off with un-economic aid. Some countries have annual floods that make for great growing conditions for rice and cotton; in this country we have to waste vast sums of limited water to replicate that. Where is the logic in that? If you spent time trying to figure out why we do the stupid things we do, you would get tired and always come to the conclusion: cause it buys someone's vote. Period.

 

[Benassflick]

Good idea and China and every other country can cut off imports to the U.S. as well.

 

[xpanda]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WildBill:
It is a stupid system. A lot of the aid we send we could withhold and cause no trouble to if we stopped paying our farmers off with un-economic aid. Some countries have annual floods that make for great growing conditions for rice and cotton; in this country we have to waste vast sums of limited water to replicate that. Where is the logic in that? If you spent time trying to figure out why we do the stupid things we do, you would get tired and always come to the conclusion: cause it buys someone's vote. Period.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure if it's the same down there, but here farmers sometimes get paid to not produce anything in a given year. It's ridiculous. We pay more in taxes to cover these subsidies, pay higher prices as a result of the subsidies, and screw over countries we're loaning money to and arguing for 'free' trade while keeping our markets unattainable to them because of duties or price fixing. It's immoral and illogical. Business and politics should have nothing to do with one another.

 

[PatPatriot]

Just like AIDS...The USA contributes more money in the fight against AIDS then ALL other countries COMBINED.
Yet these foreign assholes bitch about the US not doing enough.
Well heres a tip for ya from the Patriot,foreign bitchers, keep your dick out of another mans ass and keep the shitty needles out of your arms,never look directly into the sunlight and don't run with scissors in your hands..Jesus,how about a little common sense you fxckin degenerate cocksukers.....there,I got your tip right here.

 

[jointpleasures]

x,

Yes, They government ( we ) pay the farmers to produce nothing, that right, pay them to let weeds grow in the fields. The farmers are guaranteed this money and it's about the same amount of money as they would get for a bumper crop! The enviromentalist are involved in some way as well in making this happen.

Dorgan gets relected in North Dakota for this very reason every damn time he runs.

 

[xpanda]

I think, given time, the WTO will eradicate these subsidies. If I'm not mistaken, this falls into their jurisdiction (so to speak) as did the Brazil v. US cotton subsidy dispute. Third world countries also need to take a stronger stand when the sign on to free trade agreements with rich nations and require that duties in agriculture be dropped.

 

[jointpleasures]

It's a problem the US will solve simply by getting rid of enviromentalist wackos influence in government. You can start by getting rid of the senators who don't want to tap some oil in Alaska. Bye bye demis.

There's no need to bring this thing to court.

 

[xpanda]

Our problem is the Canadian Wheat Board and other such trade regulators. I doubt environmentalists have much to do with anything, except perhaps preventing de-forestation in certain regions.