Generous Americans

by Jack

 

To all the leftwing, Kool-Aid swilling  dipstick democrats out here that think America does NOT  spend enough on safety nets for their own people or for helping the poor of the world,  try these facts on for size and then get over yourself.  I don’t want to hear anymore of your BS:

We spend roughly 66% of every tax dollar on welfare, federal retirements, social security, Medicare, Medicade, SNAP and CHIP.  Source 2013 Office of management and budget.

$3.5 trillion dollars was spent on these programs and $643 billion was borrowed money.  This amount is equal to about 21% of our nations GDP.  As for the borrowed money, this deficit will ultimately be paid for by future taxpayers, like yourself.   1/5th of the federal budget is on borrowed money.  Does that mean anything to you?

The U.S. sent approximately $37,680,000,000 overseas in 2012 for foreign aid, according to Finance Degree Center, a website dedicated to finance education.

The total amount, which includes investments in national security concerns, counterterrorism efforts and commercial and humanitarian interests, is really rather impressive when you think about it. Indeed, no other country comes even close in terms of providing other countries with monetary aid.

CASE CLOSED!

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Generous Americans

  1. Tina says:

    A 2008 report shows how the generosity picture is skewed:

    Official development assistance (ODA) is the traditional yardstick for measuring foreign aid. As a percentage of its GDP, America’s ODA is relatively low. But as former White House aide and State Department official Don Eberly notes in his new book, The Rise of Global Civil Society, the ODA-to-GDP ratio paints a misleading picture of American generosity.

    “America’s commitment of private sector resources far exceeds that of other nations and is growing even/year, with private contributions to developing countries representing 62 percent of all worldwide charitable contributions,” Eberly writes. Such private sector donations do not count as ODA. In other words, the “official” foreign aid data exclude “the many forms of engagement sponsored by the American private sector, including philanthropies, universities, businesses, and hundreds of religious and humanitarian enterprises that are producing results, often more effectively than government assistance programs. …

    after the tsunami in December 2004 a UN official took the occasion as an opportunity to criticize America. Heritage fills the holes in the officials story:

    Mr. Egeland’s criticism was based on his belief that America isn’t providing enough development assistance — specifically, aid as a percentage of gross national income (GNI). According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the U.S. is dead last in aid as a percent of GNI, at 0.15 percent. Mr. Egeland’s native Norway has a ratio of 0.92 percent.

    But there are several problems with using Mr. Egeland’s formula:

    Actual dollar contributions show that the U.S. is the world’s largest donor. The OECD calculates U.S. development assistance in 2003 at $16.2 billion — more than double the amount given by France, Germany, or any other European nation, including Norway. Japan is second at $8.9 billion.

    Private aid is ignored. Private charity isn’t much of a factor in most of the world’s countries, but it shouldn’t be overlooked when calculating America’s aid ratio. The U.S. Agency for International Development estimated that U.S. private assistance was $33.6 billion in 2000. Egeland’s calculations severely shortchange U.S. generosity.

    America’s central role in humanitarian efforts is overlooked. Egeland’s criticism becomes patently ridiculous upon looking at U.S. aid for disaster and humanitarian relief — the type of aid needed in the Indian Ocean. OECD data reveal that the U.S. gave nearly $2.5 billion in emergency and distress relief in 2003. All other countries combined gave $3.4 billion, including $475 million from France and $350 million from Norway.
    Moreover, the U.S. contributed nearly 70 percent of all food assistance.

    U.N. relief organizations depend on America. The United States is a major donor to international relief organizations, including the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which Egeland oversees, to which the U.S. is second largest donor (nearly 14 percent in 2003). America is the largest contributor to the U.N. budget at 22 percent, or $317 million, in 2004. It gives over 56 percent of the World Food Program budget.

    America’s vital military role is ignored. America’s military plays a central role during any major humanitarian crisis. No other nation has the capability to respond to crises and transport people and supplies in such large quantities. The cost of current U.S. military deployments will be measured in the hundreds of millions, none of which is credited toward America’s aid ratio.

    Not all aid is of equal value. Where U.S. aid falls behind other nations is in development assistance. But there’s a good reason for this: The evidence shows that many recipients of development assistance are becoming poorer. Consider sub-Saharan Africa. Of the 45 sub-Saharan African countries for which per capita GDP data are available from 1980 to 2002, more than half saw their economies shrink or remain flat in real per capita GDP, despite receiving hundreds of billions in development assistance.

    Foreign aid cannot replace domestic will to adopt good policies, without which long-term development is impossible. Instead of focusing on the amount of assistance, the United States is trying to maximize results by targeting aid to countries that adopt economic freedom, bolster the rule of law, and build the strong institutions necessary for aid to be effective.

    But even without this record, the fact that the U.S. aid pledge started small and grew larger is entirely defensible. By nature, humanitarian aid must be tailored to individual crises: Every single famine, earthquake, flood or other disaster is unique and requires different types of aid and different strategies. As death tolls climbed in the wake of the tsunami disaster and the needs of the survivors became clearer, the United States upped its humanitarian aid commitments to the region as quickly as necessary. Other countries, it should be noted, did the same, gradually increasing aid offers as the scope of the tragedy became apparent.

    Criticisms of America’s generosity fly in the face of reality. International aid experts do their organizations no favors when they criticize American largess — especially since they would find it impossible to follow through on their good intentions without it.

    Amen!

  2. Chris says:

    You’ve missed Thomas Sowell’s Big Question: “Compared to what?”

    Throwing out big scary numbers about America’s social safety net spending is irrelevant if you aren’t going to compare it to the social safety net spending of other Western democracies, as well as the results.

    You did compare foreign aid spending, but I haven’t really seen any liberals deny that we spend more on that than other countries, and that’s not a big part of the debate right now.

  3. Harold says:

    It is time to reflect on WHY this is happening and division is taking place in America today, created solely by the current Administration desire to split us apart.

    Elections are coming this year and we have the opportunity to stop this un American process of “A County Divided” and begin to work our way back to a what we were once proud to be, A country United in purpose, and beneficial in scope and promise to the rest of the world, not just another 2nd or 3rd world entity to be ruled. and not Governed through the peoples voice

  4. Steve says:

    Since we’re on the subject of welfare, I want to know how much of every dollar spent on welfare actually goes to a person in need, and how much ends up in the pockets of the public employees and their unions?

    Is it 5 cents out of every dollar that makes it to a poor family? Is it 10 cents? I do believe the Salvation Army promises to get something like 70% of donations to people in need. See what I’m getting at?

    And when we talk welfare lets not forget that California carries the weight of the world. We have 12% of the nation’s population but we carry over 30% of the welfare burden, meaning other states are getting off cheap while we house their poor. This doesn’t just impact our state spending, it impacts our schools and criminal justice system as well. But, I’ll avoid that rant for now.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Steve you make a good point and it would appear by all the numbers that I have seen we are lucky to get one dime out of every tax dollar for it’s intended purpose, the rest goes to overhead.

  5. Tina says:

    So Chris, we spend $.66 of every tax dollar on social spending according to the OMB. Since you believe that’s not enough what is the figure you would prefer?

    Why is the OMB number ($.66 of every dollar) a “big scary” number since you believe it isn’t enough?

    Both parties have agreed that several of these social programs are unsustainable and are the major cause of the rising debt, but democrats refuse to seriously consider reforms to the programs. What is your proposal for avoiding economic collapse under the weight of transfer payments and interest on the debt?

    Are you interested in living in a nation like Greece where young people took to the streets because they couldn’t find work?

    Where will the money come from when your dreams come true, investment in the private sector slows to a drip, and the debt overwhelms the budget?

    You actually have a college degree, right?

    It’s a shame that the investment we made in your education has left you so illiterate and unprepared for the future as a contributing citizen and voter.

  6. Tina says:

    As long as we’re talking spending and budgets…the GAO just reported that the sequester resulted in one…count em one…lost government job.

    If you recall both the president and Maxine Waters warned of huge job losses….Maxine cited 170 million jobs lost!

    Maxine buys into the long drawn out process of keeping interest rates down to improve the economy…how’s that hope and change working out for America now?

  7. Tina says:

    Steve you get a gold star for restraining that rant 😉

    Please go ahead and hold forth any time it seems appropriate.

    CNN’s Money reported the following about disaster relief:

    To get the biggest bang for the buck, CharityWatch advises, consumers should donate to charities that use at least 75% of donations for direct aid. The Red Cross, at 91%, is well above that mark.

    Another charity, Feeding America, generally puts 98% of donations toward feeding the hungry. But in the wake of disasters like the recent tornado, 100% is used for feeding victims, thanks to funding it receives from insurer AllState for its disaster relief program.

    The Salvation Army typically spends 82% of donations on aid. But during disasters, it draws from its budget so it can direct 100% at relief efforts.

    Meanwhile, 85% of donations to World Vision and 92% of donations to Feed the Children are put toward relief efforts.

    The government bureaucracy can’t touch that!

    According to this GAO report’s title: “The Federal Government should but doesn’t know the cost of administering its assistance programs: report to the Congress”

  8. Tina says:

    Nicely said Harold!

  9. Tina says:

    Dewey we are not here to answer your endless questions or do research for you. If you have information please offer it. Try to stick to one subject at a time…none of us have the time to entertain your every thought.

    Obama, The Great Uniter – IBD:

    April 2008…he dismissed small-town folks as “bitter” people who “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them”

    …told Joe the Plumber that he planned to “spread the wealth around.” …

    • “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that.”

    • “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”

    • “I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”

    • “I will cut taxes — cut taxes — for 95% of all working families.”

    • “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times.”

    • “Get in Their Faces.”

    • “The Cambridge police acted stupidly.”

    • “Those who have done well, including me, should pay their fair share in taxes.”

    There’s more. He once said his grandmother “is a typical white person,” told Latinos they should say “We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends,” and complained about “our own right-wing domestic terrorists who are subverting the American democratic process.”

    Earlier this year, a Gallup Poll found Obama to be, in the words of the Washington Post, “The most polarizing president. Ever.”

    Flopping Aces:

    No one has done more in last several decades with his inflammatory community organizer rhetoric to divide this country than Barack Obama.

    ** Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
    ** Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
    ** Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
    ** Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
    ** Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
    ** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
    ** Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
    ** Obama: “My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”
    ** Obama: “I will be happy to see the Republicans test whether or not I’m itching for a fight on a whole range of issues. I suspect they will find I am.”
    ** Obama: “It’s tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers”
    ** Obama: “We’re going to punish our enemies”
    ** Obama: “Those aren’t the kinds of folks who represent our core American values.”

    And there’s this:

    ** “All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.”

    African Americans: “Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes. Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’.”

    Americans: Are “not a model for the world” and have a “tragic history.” Also, “we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” and, more recently, we have gotten “a little soft” and lost our “competitive edge.”

    Bankers: “Fat cats”

    Border enforcement: Its overzealous adherents want “alligators and moats” on the border and would arrest children on their way to get ice cream.

    The Cambridge, Mass., police: “Acted stupidly” and, like law-enforcement officers in general, racially profile

    Corporate-jet owners: “Are you willing to compromise your kids’ safety so some corporate-jet owner can get a tax break?”

    Democratic base: Must “shake off this lethargy. People need to buck up . . . if people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren’t serious in the first place.”

    Doctors: Needlessly chop off the limbs of diabetics and take out tonsils to increase their own profits

    Donald Trump: A “carnival barker”

    Grandmother: “Typical white person”

    Las Vegas: Where you are likely to “blow a bunch of cash when you’re trying to save for college”

    Millionaires: They don’t pay their “fair share” and are synonymous with those who have 1,000 times more.

    Nancy Reagan: Don’t “get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any séances.”

    Rural Pennsylvanians: “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment.”

    Sarah Palin: “You can put lipstick on a pig. It’s still a pig.”

    Special Olympics: Comparable to the president’s dismal bowling scores

    Super Bowl: Where you go “on the taxpayer’s dime”

    Supreme Court: Would “open the floodgates for special interests”

    Supreme Court Justice Thomas: “I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. I don’t think that he, I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation.”

    Tea Party: “The teabag, anti-government people”

    “Corporations” and “greed” seem to go together in every Obama address. “Spread the wealth around” and all forms of higher taxes on successful entrepreneurs are part of the president’s reelection platform. I don’t recall a President benefiting from so much American innovative business success (Facebook, Google, Twitter, Groupon and scores more) who is so hostile to the concept of the American Dream. (continues)

    The President is all partisan ideology all of the time and the tactic of his party has always been to divide people into groups and pander to some while demonizing others. They don’t win by inspiring a nation of Americans but by pitting groups against each other.

    Dewey it doesn’t matter that you don’t belong to this party. You are one of them.

  10. Tina says:

    Dewey: “Are you saying there was no information there?”

    I’m saying that you move from one thought to another and make wild accusations to such a degree that most of the time no one can begin to know what you are saying much less respond to you.

    I asked you to stick to one subject at a time for clarity and communication purposes.

  11. Tina says:

    Dewey: “I ask again are Tea Party Seniors willing to give up their social security and medicare to make their point? … no they are not.”

    I maintain that they “are not” because the Democrat Party and its media machine tell them Republicans are going to “tke their social security away” They tell them that because they want to scare them into voting democrat.

    Given accurate information Seniors would vote for much needed reforms.

    They would need to be given information about the reason reform is needed. They would need to understand how the reforms would work. One plan that was suggested would help to secure the old system for those over fifty while giving those under fifty the CHOICE to use a percentage of their contributions to invest in a private account that belongs to them and can be passed on to their children if they die before it is all used.

    As I recently wrote private accounts have been adopted by three counties in Texas and they are working well and delivering more return to those invested than their SS would have in the old system.

    So you are wrong Dewey, in my opinion. Once more you are simply uttering left talking points, something that you claim to be above.

    I see you Dewey. Perhaps you don’t realize how partisan (Democrat) your views are…but I doubt it

  12. Libby says:

    “The U.S. sent approximately $37,680,000,000 overseas in 2012 for foreign aid, according to Finance Degree Center, a website dedicated to finance education.”

    Well, we’d let you crow … were it not that the bulk of these monies are paid to American companies to provide said foreign aid, e.g., the Bechtel Corporation, all the “Big Oils” … and what’s Halliburton calling itself these days?

    Honestly, Jack, how dim are we supposed to be?

  13. Pie Guevara says:

    El Stupido is beating the living crap out of Blame The Victim Libby for whiny moron of the year award.

  14. Libby says:

    Pie!

    Were you going to assert that Bechtel Corporation does NOT receive taxpayers monies in the form of “foreign aid”?

    No? Just yer usual sniveling?

    I see.

    So does everybody else.

    Someday you will too. But as I just reminded Jack, nobody should be holding their breath.

  15. Pie Guevara says:

    Blame The Victim Libby should seriously consider giving up the hallucinatory drugs.

Comments are closed.