Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is obviously wrong to spend tax dollars on foreign aid like this. This is a matter for charity, not forced taxation. I'll let others elaborate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Compulsive charity is not smart government. Still, it goes on all the time. There isn't much we can do about it.
:shrug:

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

[ QUOTE ]
And we don't technically live in a democacy. A large percentage of Americans don't even pay federal income tax, so why should they get to decide where federal income tax dollars get spent?

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah! and did you know some people don't even own land!? why do they get to vote! it's an outrage i tell you! the rich, now they know how to handle money! their opinions are much more valuable than those of the poor, those who don't earn enough money to have to pay income tax!


[ QUOTE ]
We are heading in that direction quite quickly. Although in this case, it's not voting themselves money, it's voting for money to be spent on some country that has never done anything for us.

[/ QUOTE ]

35 mil for disaster victims isn't exactly going to break the bank, hack, you're being unrealistic. now the 200 bil we've spent on the war... but that's not exactly foreign aid. (probably going to be sorry i even brouught that up, huh?)

----------------------------------------------------------

I posted the rest of this as part of another post in the other tsunami aid thread- i don't know if you read this far into my post- do you really think that the only reason we give away foreign aid is to satisfy the bleeding hearts of liberals who only want to help those poor, poor people?

non-altrustic resons for giving foreign aid

First, the United States has a political interest in securing the collective goodwill of the international community. Giving aid to disaster victims, developing countries, victims of genocide, war, famine and tyranny goes a long way towards establishing that good will, at a relatively small cost. additionally private contributions through 'the society to end world hunger' (I made that charity up as a sample name only) simply don't generate such goodwill as effectively as planeloads of rice labeled "USA".

second, the united states has an economic interest in helping the less fortunate recover and develop. I refer you to the years following WWII, and the re industrialization of Japan and Germany, and those country’s subsequent recovery and participation in the world economy. Giving a little now to keep a nation from collapsing or suffering unduly can go a long way towards establishing a profitable economic relationship. we live in an increasingly globalized world, and what effects those nations struck by tragedies effects us as well.

Third, the united states has a national security interest in giving foreign aid. some examples would be our support of Pakistan and president Musharraf, aid considerations for Libya after they had promised to dismantle their WMD research and make reparations for past crimes, lots of aid to post-soviet Russia to prevent a slide back into totalitarianism, aid to finally stabilize the Balkans, etc, etc, etc.

bottom line, giving foreign aid is +EV

He already gave
 

[ QUOTE ]
How very Canadian of you. I take it you will be contributing all of your poker winnings to the victims of the tsunami, as well as any extra money you may have lying around.

They appreciate your support.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are talking about aid coming from tax money. Your income and the Caniadian's income have already been taxed! So it's not a matter of "charity" as you put it. Charity is up to every individual on its own - and there is no harm in NOT giving to charity. But after we all chip in to the tax man, we get to decide how the tax money is spent. (Or, as we do here now, to debate the actions of those we elected to spend!)

HDPM says that government-to-government aid should be discontinued, for any cause and for ever. He says only (private) charity should do such work.

I say this is either good irony from the part of HDPM or popyycock. I'll let you elaborate.

Great post
 

But why confuse people with facts? In the middle of the holiday season too...

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

[ QUOTE ]
The U.S. has pledged $35M to help affected areas recover from the tsunami disaster. If my memory serves me correctly, Bush gave several $ billion to hurricaine relief in Florida. Anybody else bothered by this staggering difference?

Personally, I can't think of a single more worthy cause for U.S. dollars to be spent than international relief like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not. It's the latest headline. Next week there'll be a new "single most worthy cause".

natedogg

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

[ QUOTE ]
Of course not. It's the latest headline. Next week there'll be a new "single most worthy cause".

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you really that cynical about life and others' intentions?

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

Actually, most Americans fall in the altruist/socialist/communist trap like you Canadians and don't agree with me. However, I do think it is very American of me, even though many Americans no longer have American values. So I take you attempted insult as a compliment. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]


Hey, I heard a Canadian say three countries prohibited hiring a doctor privately. North Korea, Cuba, and Canada. Is this true?

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

If aid is given in our self interest only it may be OK. If it is for charity, as the original poster at least implies, it is wrong.

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

Lived in Canada for 3 yrs....

The country and people have such a different mentality its actually eye opening. It is fundamentally a Socialist nation...thats the way most Canadians want it and their government is merely an expression of their collective will. That being said 77% of the MD awarded at the medical school at the university I was attending (McGill Univ VERY good med school) were planning on practicing medicine abroad...3/4 of them in U.S..

Re: $35M Aid to Disaster Relief
 

If aid is given in our self interest only it may be OK. If it is for charity, as the original poster at least implies, it is wrong.

Is that the measure you personally use when giving any donations (if you do donate any money to anybody)?