BleacherCoaches.com

I'll agree to an extent that as the wealthiest nation, our contribution should probably be more. But why are we always slapped in the face by those that lean liberal?

It's because of the liberal, socialist mindset that wealth must be redistributed. I've made this basic arguement a hundred times it seems.

Hypothetically, if you make 100,000 a year, and I make 20,000 a year, and you donate 500 to this tragedy and I donate 200, are you cheap or stingy because your donation is .5% of your income and mine is 1%? No way. You're donation should be appreciated no matter the amount. You're probably donating some of your hard earned money to other charities and maybe I'm not.

You're just looking at this one situation. What about every other charity, relief efforts, subsidies, medical aid, etc. that our country helps others with? Are all these other nations doing the same?

You add up what we give away in total, including private donations, compared to other nations, and anyone would be a fool to call us stingy.

And I'm certainly not saying poor countries should contribute as much. If you think that you're missing my point. Their contributions should be hailed - but so should ours. My point has been, and continues to be, that the idiot from the UN said we were stingy, and that Americans are begging to have our taxes our raised so that the government can determine how to spend our money. I prefer to spend my money in places I see the most need for, and things I believe in. If an American wants to sponser a child in Ethiopia, that's great. But if the next person wants to spend their money to help ministries in Haiti, that's fine too. And if someone has already donated all their disposable income to a charity and has nothing left to give for this, that person should not belittled because of it. It's our money that we earned - we should have the choice to spend it as we see fit. The UN won't be happy until we have a Socialist world.

As for what the Hollywood types donate, I can't back it up. But I'd be interested in what Springsteen acutally gives out of his pocket. I don't think it would be far off to say that he uses his name to build up donations for those 2 dozen charities off the backs of those that like his music - and he gets the credit for it. I'm not saying that's entirely a bad thing, just that I believe they get a lot of credit for personal sacrifices over the Average Joe when I don't believe that's the case. That's ok in the liberal eyes, but not ok for the government.

Happy New Year to all. I don't have my internet up at my new house yet so I been in the dark for awhile.

This tragedy is just incomprehensible. I think the death toll could reach 500,000 when its all said and done.

The UN showed its lack of class and leadership for their criticism and another reason why it should not be the voice of the globe. The criticism from the UN is the money the UN receives from gov't's to coordinate the aid. The figures are based on countries % of GDP in relation to aid. While the US gov't might not match the GDP donation of other countries the private donations from US citizens more than fills in any so called lack of aid from the gov't. After the Oil-for-food fiasco I wouldn't give the UN a red nickel.

Runner I didn't see any figures for France and Germany in the article and they are wealthy G6 nations.

Southpaw, find the chart about half way through the article that lists what the countries have given (as of 12/31). Just above the chart their are the numbers 1-5 for the 5 pages that are part of that chart. You'll be able to find the other countries listed there.

LP, we're probably closer to agreement on this than many other topics we've discussed. I agree that we're not stingy as a nation or as a collective group of individuals. I can't flatly say that we are the most generous nation on earth given the numbers I've seen.

You ceratainly hit the nail on the head when you said it all comes back to Iraq. It was, and continues to be, an extremely divisive war. We know full well that most of the world and many citizens of this country are against the war. I'm not trying to re-has the should we/shouldn't we be at war argument. We've been through that enough times already. In the game of politics, if you do something I disagree with, then I'm going to do something to get even.

http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/pressconfe ... c041227.rm

The above link will take you to a real player press conference the Washington Compost reporter story comes from. If you read the compost story, you will note the story uses the word "suggests" and not "quote" the words of U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland. He did not say the US of A was stingy.

Egeland is the press conference was asked to name countries he thought where stingy and he declined to do so.

its a shame for all thoose people to die

i heard the tole is sapposed to double

[quote="Lemmy";p="78556"]http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/pressconfe ... c041227.rm

The above link will take you to a real player press conference the Washington Compost reporter story comes from. If you read the compost story, you will note the story uses the word "suggests" and not "quote" the words of U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland. He did not say the US of A was stingy.

Egeland is the press conference was asked to name countries he thought where stingy and he declined to do so.[/quote]

Come on Lemmy, when he says the rich nations could contribute more and their contributions are "rather stingy", just who do you think he is referring to. You know it, I know it, don't try to defend this. His timing of the speech was immediately following the US announcement of our initial donation.

The UN is just infuriated that we give more money to charitable organizations and not to them. The Oil for Food Scandal is enough evidence that maybe Americans shouldn't their money to the UN until real changes are made.

i understand that we need to donate money...don't get me wrong, but what's going to happen over there??? i mean seriously what can we do? it'll take years and years to rebuild what was lost! and by that time most people will be dead anyways. are they planning to evacuate people there? because if they don't do that they will mostly die eventually. like i said don't get me wrong i want to help anyway we can, but i just don't see how we can even take a plan of action to something this emense!

I think that something as insignificant as warm, dry blankets and hot soup will go a long way towards helping anyone who has lost everything.