What America Owes The World...

So what was the point here again? Is America helping too much or not enough? Should we not ever mention that we helped other countries?

0 Replies

According to the Congressional Budget Office, international discretionary spending (which embraces foreign aid, both civil and military, as well as other categories of international discretionary spending) in 1962 was $5,500,000,000 (that's in billions of dollars), and in 2003, $27,900,000,000. However, in terms of a percentage of gross domestic product, international discretionary spending fell from one per cent in 1962 to .3 % in 2003.

You can check this out for yourself here. The relevant tables are numbers seven and eight.

0 Replies

The point is that some think we aren't spending enough while others believe we are.

Debate ensues until the sides are chosen and then the personal attacks start. It's the typical MO here at A2K.

0 Replies

Zat so?

Where are the personal attacks, Boss?

If this is so unpleasant to you, why do you stick around?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

The point is that some think we aren't spending enough while others believe we are.

Debate ensues until the sides are chosen and then the personal attacks start. It's the typical MO here at A2K.

I've noticed that.

I think there is a lot of aid being given be all kinds of nations, but we don't hear about that. I wonder why.

0 Replies

kitchenpete wrote:

How much self interest was there in those actions?

Probably no more than was inherent in Chamberlain's actions when he chose to allow Hitler to take what the US later chose to take back. (You see, there's more than one flavor of self-interest).

0 Replies

Isn't there always self interest involved? I personally don't care if there's self interest involved in a good deed, on any level. Its the good deed, the aid, that matters.

0 Replies

Scrat wrote:

kitchenpete wrote:
How much self interest was there in those actions?

Probably no more than was inherent in Chamberlain's actions when he chose to allow Hitler to take what the US later chose to take back. (You see, there's more than one flavor of self-interest).

OK - so you've asked for it...did the US "not care" at that point? Chamberlain was replaced by Churchill, who led Britain ALONE against Germany until 1942, which was, erm...THREE YEARS after the start of the war in Europe. Twisted Evil

My original point is that we should forget all about that era and look on what we've got now, relative to other nations. The UK is not perfect but some of you don't seem to be able to criticise the USA. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

ConstantlyQuestioning wrote

Quote:

Thank you Scrat. I wonder if saving Europe from Nazism and Asia from Japanese Imperialism could be considered Foreign Aid. How many millions of dollars were spent and how many American lives paid for that aid.

An interesting view you have here. Now listen to this one:
I wonder if saving USA from Nazism was really paid enough by the USA aid after WW2, when the nations near Germany, who were trampled first, served as a buffer with human bodies and homes so that USA got through it unscratched, and now has 'the great economy'?
What about paying tribute to the millions of people in France, Yugoslavia, Chech republic, Russia, etc. who gave their life?
This argument is more valid than yours since Germany was after USA, ultimately. Of course, first Britain and Russia would have to fall..

0 Replies

IMO we owe the world not a cent. IMO the world owes us not a cent. IMO it is in our best interest to forward development and aid is one way of achieving this (though reduction of tariffs and protectionism is the "teach a man to fish" way).

0 Replies

Quote:

What about paying tribute to the millions of people in France, Yugoslavia, Chech republic, Russia, etc. who gave their life?

Fair criticism. And I do. However, I only mentioned the Americans because that is what is up for debate: does America give enough to the world.

Quote:

Isn't there always self interest involved? I personally don't care if there's self interest involved in a good deed, on any level. Its the good deed, the aid, that matters

.

Agreed LRR.

Quote:

OK - so you've asked for it...did the US "not care" at that point? Chamberlain was replaced by Churchill, who led Britain ALONE against Germany until 1942, which was, erm...THREE YEARS after the start of the war in Europe.

Pete, is your point that America should have gotten into the war earlier?

Quote:

The UK is not perfect but some of you don't seem to be able to criticise the USA

I could criticise the USA, but I think my criticisms would be different from yours :wink:

Quote:

According to the Congressional Budget Office, international discretionary spending (which embraces foreign aid, both civil and military, as well as other categories of international discretionary spending) in 1962 was $5,500,000,000 (that's in billions of dollars), and in 2003, $27,900,000,000. However, in terms of a percentage of gross domestic product, international discretionary spending fell from one per cent in 1962 to .3 % in 2003.

Again I don't see why a lesser percentage is equal to bad. The amount we give increased from '62 to '03. Shouldn't the fact the it is a lesser percentage say something about the robustness (is that a word?) of our economy.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

IMO we owe the world not a cent. IMO the world owes us not a cent. IMO it is in our best interest to forward development and aid is one way of achieving this (though reduction of tariffs and protectionism is the "teach a man to fish" way).

Very much to the point. According to the CBO, in terms of a percentage of the gross domestic product, we are spending 70% less on foreign aid now than in 1962.

0 Replies

ConstantlyQuestioning wrote:

Again I don't see why a lesser percentage is equal to bad. The amount we give increased from '62 to '03. Shouldn't the fact the it is a lesser percentage say something about the robustness (is that a word?) of our economy.

Upon what basis should it be a declaration of the robust nature of our economy as opposed to our declining eleemosynary commitments?

0 Replies

Quote:

Upon what basis should it be a declaration of the robust nature of our economy as opposed to our declining eleemosynary commitments?

On the basis that while we give more, it affects us less. It's still more than was given in the past.

0 Replies

You are going to have to expound, it's still not making sense to me.

"the basis that while we give more, it affects us less" means..?

0 Replies

If I had a dollar and gave you 25 cents, I am giving you 25% of my money. If I have 10 dollars and give you a dollar, I have quadrupled what I initially gave you, but it remains only 10% of what I have.

More money, less percentage wise.

I believe this is what CQ is saying, but I could be mistaken.

0 Replies

Yes, but upon what basis does he declare that kind of statistics twisting to be the relevant factor?

He says the fact that we give less of a percentage should be attributed to our economic might.

Why?

0 Replies

Because the GDP is higher now than in in 1962?

0 Replies

If you gave me a dollar in 1962, i could buy a pack of smokes and put three or four gallons of gas in the tank. If you gave me ten dollars today, i could still buy a pack of smokes and put three gallons of gas in the tank (definitely not four); so the equation of figuring budget expenditures in terms of a percentage of the gross national product is a means of expressing purchasing power. So, the 5,500,000,000 of 1962 has grown to slightly more than five times that amount in 2003. However, that pack of smokes and quarter tank of gas costs ten times as much.

An' thas the truff . . .

0 Replies

Quote:

You are going to have to expound, it's still not making sense to me.

"the basis that while we give more, it affects us less" means..?

It means that instead of looking for a handout, these developing countries should be looking at our example. How can America give so much but be affected by it so little? What are they doing that we're not? What economic lessons can we learn from them?

0 Replies

What America Owes The World...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know