Will the World Like the US Better Under Obama?

Not the whole world. Here's a short list of countries that will like us if Obama becomes President:

1. Kenya
2. Palestine
3. Libya
4. North Korea
5. Iran

Why Kenya? Iran, Libya and North korea will always hate you. Most of the free world will start loving you again if Obama is put in office...Get rid of the dumb Jesus Freak you have in there at the moment and the lerve will start flowing again...:cool:
 
gee, since when isnt 12 over 4 3 times as much?
guess that makes you a moron as well

The only sum that matters is GDP per head of population. IOW, I, in little old New Zealand, give more than you in aid....Are you really that dense? <rhetorical question, no need to answer> :ahole-1:
 
The only sum that matters is GDP per head of population. IOW, I, in little old New Zealand, give more than you in aid....Are you really that dense? <rhetorical question, no need to answer> :ahole-1:
who says only GDP matters?
you fucking morons

i see your asshole and raise you a fucking moron
 
who says only GDP matters?
you fucking morons

i see your asshole and raise you a fucking moron

I bet you'd love to see my arsehole. And you are already a moron if you don't think GDP matters. As I said, per head of population, I give more than you do. Almost twice as much as fact. Stop being such a tightwad Dive. Give more ya miserable bastard...
 
I bet you'd love to see my arsehole. And you are already a moron if you don't think GDP matters. As I said, per head of population, I give more than you do. Almost twice as much as fact. Stop being such a tightwad Dive. Give more ya miserable bastard...
nawe, it was a poker theme, but i'm sure you would get a thrill out of thinking i would really want to
 
Actually the large majority of them are bribes, not gifts. America gives out a lot of "aid", but most of it comes with preconditions.

And it's not only the preconditions, but the fact that, historically, the US has given the most aid to some of the most brutal regimes of recent times. A lot of the "tied" aid is also usually reserved for defense spending (i.e. some of the money has to be spent buying US-made weapons).

Sometimes I see some people say "aid is giving money to dictators! foreign aid is a sham!", and the sad thing is that they are right- a lot of the money IS given to authoritarian regimes, especially those that are staunch US client states so that they can buy weapons. This is usually done at the expense of programs that could expand meaningful social and economic development, in particular because these staunch regimes often actually oppress any form of democracy and development. So, that kind of aid is not very useful.
 
pee1.gif
i Was Exposing Your Lies.

Shame Shame Shame

:)
 
And it's not only the preconditions, but the fact that, historically, the US has given the most aid to some of the most brutal regimes of recent times. A lot of the "tied" aid is also usually reserved for defense spending (i.e. some of the money has to be spent buying US-made weapons).

Sometimes I see some people say "aid is giving money to dictators! foreign aid is a sham!", and the sad thing is that they are right- a lot of the money IS given to authoritarian regimes, especially those that are staunch US client states so that they can buy weapons. This is usually done at the expense of programs that could expand meaningful social and economic development, in particular because these staunch regimes often actually oppress any form of democracy and development. So, that kind of aid is not very useful.

Actually I suspect that MOST of the so-called aid we give comes in the form of US made arms.

Israel, for example, gets billions but most of it comes as advanced weapons made in the USA.

Part of the reason America is now de-industrialized comes from the pressure of the cold war, ya know?

Multiple pressures occurred at the same time.

On one hand, we wanted to lure allies so we agreed to give their government arms to fight communists, and in order to sweeten that pot we lifted tariffs for goods coming from thier nations to get them to become our allies, too.

Sure, we were screwing American garment manufacurers, steel makes, car makers and so forth, but we were also helping arms manufacturers in this nation, because when the American tax payer bought those arms and shipped them over to those foriegn nation, so those American arms merchants did very well, indeed, while other American indistries paid the price for those policies.

And every time the industries which were getting screwed complained about it, the opposition called them isolationists and implied that they were living in the 19th century and didn't understand how modern economies worked!

We still see this happening now, in fact.

Complain about free trade, suggest that it is a goofy policy that is breaking the bank, and people will rush in to start misquoting Adam Smith and telling you that you don't understand economics.

Of course, it doesn't take a degree in ECON to read the imbalance of trade numbers, but those free-trade faithful just sort of want us to ignore the numbers and stick with their shortsighted and basically mistaken theories about trade and economics.

Hey, I'm a po' boy from PA, and I've watched those factories going out of business as we imported all those foreigh made goods since at least the late 60s.
 
You're in the oval office ain't ya? You ever heard the term "foreign policy"...or "the American dollar"? You don't get out much do ya Willow?

that was no explanation at all. but that's okay I won't badger you.
 
Actually the large majority of them are bribes, not gifts. America gives out a lot of "aid", but most of it comes with preconditions.




bribes, gifts, call em whatever, wealth redistribution is more like it.
 
bribes, gifts, call em whatever, wealth redistribution is more like it.

Yeah, that what it is, alright.

Now there might have been cases where the investment was a good one, but I'm having trouble thinking of any case where the good it did didn't cost the American people far more than they got out of it.
 
Of course your source doesn't count US private donations; it is therefore bullshit.

And you don't want the government to give aide, remember? You want it to be left up to selfish bastards such as yourself, which usually ends up being NOTHING!
 
Again, pure bullshit. Stats prove that conservatives give more to charity than liberals. :eusa_whistle:

Yes, because the really rich get tax write offs for donating. It's actually stupid for them not to donate. Not little tax breaks like your broke ass gets. We're talking thousands of dollars.

I work with a book called Tax Economics of Charitable Giving. It "unlocks" all the tax saving secrets that the rich get when they donate. Maybe you should buy it if your broke ass can afford $250 for the book. Oh that's right. It's only for people who give LARGE amounts to charity. In other words, they get tax breaks that you don't get no matter how generous you are.
 

Forum List

Back
Top