14 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
14 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Percentage-wise, Guess How Much Of Uncle Sam's Money Goes To Foreign Aid.

by Joe Mobley
11 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |
How much of the federal budget goes to foreign aid?

What's your best guess? 10 percent? 20 percent? 1 percent?

If you're like most Americans, you probably guessed wrong.
Think about it, then go here,

Guess How Much Of Uncle Sam's Money Goes To Foreign Aid. Guess Again! : Goats and Soda : NPR

Joe Mobley
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    FIRST of all, 1 percent of $4 trillion is a LOT!!!!!!! SECOND of all, THEY ARE WRONG! MOST foreign aid isn't called foreign aid, and most the government really has no idea about. It is provided through foreign benefits, like cuts in duties, like those given to CHINA! It is given through all the special visas, etc... And DON'T FORGET! We DON'T have the 1% of $4trillion to give out, so what about all the INTEREST?

    YEP! Rename a bunch of things, let illegals in, give special duties/exemptions/purchase deals, etc.... And 1% could EASILY become 30% or more.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9879208].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

    I wonder what you thought the percentage was before reading that article?
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9879999].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      It's enshrined in law, over here. It's only 0.7% of GDP, but it's a legal obligation.

      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880022].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
      I thought about that for a minute but really had no clue.

      I do think that many of us would be angry about many of the places our money went, and the amounts, and for what reasons.

      I think that 2-3 billion dollars went to Pakistan last year. Really?
      How about the government of Pakistan pay us 2-3 billion for their continued existence.

      We can reevaluate at the end of the year.



      Joe Mobley


      Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

      I wonder what you thought the percentage was before reading that article?
      Signature

      .

      Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880142].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        I thought about that for a minute but really had no clue.

        I do think that many of us would be angry about many of the places our money went, and the amounts, and for what reasons.

        I think that 2-3 billion dollars went to Pakistan last year. Really?
        How about the government of Pakistan pay us 2-3 billion for their continued existence.

        We can reevaluate at the end of the year.



        Joe Mobley

        No doubt there's lots in the FP budget for everyone to dislike.


        Since the Pakistanies have nukes I think we need to watch and work with them closely. What if those nukes fell into the hands of the taliban or AQ?

        BTW...


        As long as they have control of those nukes, no one - not even us can threaten their existence as a nation.

        That's why some countries will do just about anything to get at least one.
        Signature

        "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880163].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator View Post

          No doubt there's lots in the FP budget for everyone to dislike.


          Since the Pakistanies have nukes I think we need to watch and work with them closely. What if those nukes fell into the hands of the taliban or AQ?

          BTW...


          As long as they have control of those nukes, no one - not even us can threaten their existence as a nation.
          Given their past actions, there may be little difference. Perhaps al quida ALREADY has nukes! USING them is ANOTHER story! Obama is guilty of telling a LOT of #$%^&* in this area, but apparently he IS right about the US being one of the most muslim populated, based on number, nations. NUKES are NOT the perfect weapon. FAR FROM IT! Any group with even a LITTLE understanding should realize that nukes are a matter of last resort. ESPECIALLY with a LARGE country like the US. And the reason why a large country makes a difference is not solely because attacking one side could cause another to retaliate and obliterate you, but also because it would take more nuclear power to destroy them, and the natural repercussions would be that much worse.

          Perhaps al quida figured that out, because I imagine it would be ********VERY******* easy to create a dirty bomb! I mean they HAVE the bombs, and Iran, for one, has PLENTY of nuclear trash! Of course pakistan, and saudi arabia do ALSO! They could EVEN offer to haul away some of JAPAN'S! And NOBODY made a secret of how dangerous JAPAN'S is! It hurt their GDP! They EVACUATED entire cities! The whole PLANET was in an UPROAR! Germany, and others, halted nuclear construction, and started decommissioning plants!

          And YEAH, we are afraid of Iran getting THE nuclear bomb! They COULD create a dirty one, if they wanted. But they want the kind that creates a quick(potentially instant) destruction to a LARGE area. It uses the nuclear material to create a very large explosion. To do that, they need highly refined radioactive material. A DIRTY bomb is slower(potentially weeks) to a far smaller area. It uses the nuclear material to create biological havok. So people are working on bombs that would cause a situation like ground zero in nagasaki and hiroshima, and a dirty bomb will create a situation like the periphery of those explosions. BOTH have been widely talked about, and japan certainly considered both as bad. They may STILL be seeing effects from it, because they lasted LONG after the bombs blew up.

          Of course the whole idea of a terrorist is not really to actually DO anything, but to strike TERROR in your enemy's hearts that you MIGHT! As FONZI on "happy days" often said, "You can only use a threat if you have a reputation of carrying it out."! That was always the reason given for his being able to clear a room when the others couldn't.

          HECK, this is the kind of reason given for things like working with india and israel. They are friendlier, and work AGAINST the others. Ironically, Russia and Israel may not even exist if not for the US. I don't know about india, but Israel was basically doomed from day one and Russia was doomed in the early 20th century, and the US gave them a LOT of NEEDED support.

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880246].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

            Given their past actions, there may be little difference. Perhaps al quida ALREADY has nukes! USING them is ANOTHER story! Obama is guilty of telling a LOT of #$%^&* in this area, but apparently he IS right about the US being one of the most muslim populated, based on number, nations. NUKES are NOT the perfect weapon. FAR FROM IT! Any group with even a LITTLE understanding should realize that nukes are a matter of last resort. ESPECIALLY with a LARGE country like the US. And the reason why a large country makes a difference is not solely because attacking one side could cause another to retaliate and obliterate you, but also because it would take more nuclear power to destroy them, and the natural repercussions would be that much worse.

            Perhaps al quida figured that out, because I imagine it would be ********VERY******* easy to create a dirty bomb! I mean they HAVE the bombs, and Iran, for one, has PLENTY of nuclear trash! Of course pakistan, and saudi arabia do ALSO! They could EVEN offer to haul away some of JAPAN'S! And NOBODY made a secret of how dangerous JAPAN'S is! It hurt their GDP! They EVACUATED entire cities! The whole PLANET was in an UPROAR! Germany, and others, halted nuclear construction, and started decommissioning plants!

            Of course the whole idea of a terrorist is not really to actually DO anything, but to strike TERROR in your enemy's hearts that you MIGHT! As FONZI on "happy days" often said, "You can only use a threat if you have a reputation of carrying it out."! That was always the reason given for his being able to clear a room when the others couldn't.

            HECK, this is the kind of reason given for things like working with india and israel. They are friendlier, and work AGAINST the others. Ironically, Russia and Israel may not even exist if not for the US. I don't know about india, but Israel was basically doomed from day one and Russia was doomed in the early 20th century, and the US gave them a LOT of NEEDED support.

            Steve

            If AQ already had nukes I think we'd already know about it.


            Can't keep O out your mouth can you?
            Signature

            "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880251].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        I do think that many of us would be angry about many of the places our money went, and the amounts, and for what reasons.
        Exactly so - this is always very much the point, isn't it?

        One hears all sorts of often-understandable complaints about that over here, also.

        (But perhaps not so much when some of it goes to medical charities in those African countries to help them control and limit the spread of Ebola, which we all want to avoid.)

        .
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880289].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
          Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

          (But perhaps not so much when some of it goes to medical charities in those African countries to help them control and limit the spread of Ebola, which we all want to avoid.)

          .
          Yes ma'am. I agree with this. If fact, I think this should be a requirement of any government before receiving financial aid from the US.

          "Every citizen will be vaccinated against (list-of-diseases). We'll even help pay for the program."

          Joe Mobley
          Signature

          .

          Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9880321].message }}

Trending Topics