Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
“(Americans) are regularly told by politicians and the media, that America is the world's most generous nation..."

---

Quote:

---

You may have noticed that the context of every defense of capitalism is: well, if they weren't motivated by starvation they wouldn't work (for us).

---

Quote:

---

There are hungry folks in parts of the EU, despite local surpluses, and the EU bans most GM food. The same EU politicians who did this would oppose distributing GM foods to the third world; both to be consistant with the EU ban and to avoid having to ban imports if the third world countries ever produced enough to export. If I were going to look for better crops for third world countries, I'd probably look at the hybrids developed over the last 30 years, which have a lot less opposition.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
As usual, cites would be nice. Not only of the quote, but of the figures noted in the quote.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
I wonder what the numbers would be like if you eliminated the aid to Israel...





" I don't believe in hypothetical situations - it's kinda like lying to your brain "

" They don't hate America, they hate Americans " Homer Simpson


Lets party like its 1939

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Policy in the EU is set by an unofficial unelected council in Brussels, where there is no food shortage. Brussels loves creating crises in the far corners of its empire to cause nations to come crawling on their hands and knees to them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Not my post, but a quick little look at the Googler brought up this Princeton study, whose results are roughly analogous to Rue's figures.

http://www.princeton.edu/~soapbox/vol2no4/24noveck.html#2

By the way, the Google keywords I used were just the first two sentences of Rue's quoted text. Enter it, hit enter, and voila! Easy as quiche, n'est-ce pas?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Geezer

Weird how you ask for cites from only ONE person, no matter how many other posts contain internet sources.

---

Quote:

---

And, do you have anything ON TOPIC to say about my post ?

---

Quote:

---

Would America still be "The Evil Infidels" & such?
Would not everyone love us? Would not oil prices come down?

---

Quote:

---

Maybe if we withdrew our troops from the 800 installations around the world, signed out of the WTO until it included and enforced worker protections and benefits for operating transparent democracies, stopped the IMF from enforcing the Chicago School of Economics, and brought capitalism to heel

---

Quote:

---

the west would lose control, and we would have a much different world. ... and anyone else who cannot respect the rights of people just to be left to be.

---

Quote:

---

hippies wouldn't advocate violence. ...that said, why do you think people all over the world hate and want Americans dead anyway. ...you keep going the way you are, someones gonna burn your country down, and be justified in doing it.

---

Quote:

---

Figures - you wanna BUY street cred... tsk tsk... money's always the answer with you Americans!

---

Quote:

---

In lots of the places the hungry peeps are, we'd have to also put in troops to make sure the magical Bail-Out money ended up feeding those hungry peeps instead of ending up in the Swiss bank accounts of various government officials of those countries.

---

Quote:

---

Since you are the one person here who most consistantly fails to provide links to the stuff you quote

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Especially if, once a cite is given or a book listed as a cite for a quote, the response given back is "Yeah, but he's just trying to sell his book."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Strange, you did not ask for a reference for this:...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I figure I have the EU's number at least as much as everyone has Israel's number. They're pretty fucking obvious about it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Did you forget about this little gem YOU posted ?
"While we're at it, a cite for this as "every defense of capitalism" would be nice."

You do SO much more than ask for references for quotes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
You do SO much more than ask for references for quotes.

---

Yes I do. I ask for cites of things stated as fact.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Okay. I consider posting cites or attributions for quotes and little-known facts to be a courtesy to the folks who'll be reading my post. Apparently several of you don't consider this type of courtesy necessary.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
So, doing some simple math:

If the EU provides roughly 90% of its food aid as money, and it provided 1.5M tons of food, that would mean that the EU provided the money equivalent of 150M tons of food, for a total of 151.5M tons of food aid equivalent.


If the US provides 90% of its aid as food, and it provided 4M tons of food, that would mean that the US provides the money equivalent of 0.4M tons of food, for a total of 4.4M tons of food aid equivalent.

EU 151.5M tons of food aid equivalent
US 4.4M tons of food aid equivalent

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
sometimes when we say 'cites please' it is in an attempt to invalidate an argument without having to deal with the logic of the argument itself.

---

Quote:

---

or are formatted with the QUOTE instruction.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
To go back to the issue of food aid... There's a huge article about it in The Nation, delving into what Rue has already mentioned: Food aid from the US is tied to purchasing food from US agribusiness, which receive huge subsidies.

---

Quote:

---

The U.S. contributed around $1.15 billion in 2009 as opposed to the EU's $238 million, so your simple math doesn't hold up.

---

Quote:

---

As noted above, the UN's World Food Programme says it gets cash from donors and buys around 80% of it's food in low or middle income countries, which would let the U.S. out as a seller. Conflicting data, what?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
MAGONSDAUGHTER has a point, whatever a gurgler is

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
The EU as a single organization contributed $238, but individual member states ASLO contributed...The actual European total is $801785968

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Geezer -- doooood


You failed to read my units. I was talking mph and you were telling me my psi was all wrong. Go back and READ my post.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Geezer, do you actually care how much the US provides in relation to other nations?

---

Quote:

---

I'd have always figured you for the camp that says public money shouldn't go to that sort of thing period. So, the less the better?

---

Quote:

---

Or is this merely an exercise in debate for the joy of the exercise itself? I do that sometimes.

---

Quote:

---

I actually find compelling arguments for halting aid altogether (as stated above) because 'making a better world' does not seem to be the end result of aid.

On the other hand, some people (above) have pointed out how we might deliver aid with a much higher effectiveness, while others have shown how effectiveness can be hampered by regional politics and lack of infrastructure.

---

Quote:

---

But honestly, if our aid has the potential to harm these people in the long run, it might be more generous to cancel all aid period, with the possible exception of specific disaster relief programs. (A sort of volunteer international insurance agency. ;-)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Geezer, do you actually care how much the US provides in relation to other nations? I'd have always figured you for the camp that says public money shouldn't go to that sort of thing period. So, the less the better?

Or is this merely an exercise in debate for the joy of the exercise itself? I do that sometimes.

I actually find compelling arguments for halting aid altogether (as stated above) because 'making a better world' does not seem to be the end result of aid.


On the other hand, some people (above) have pointed out how we might deliver aid with a much higher effectiveness, while others have shown how effectiveness can be hampered by regional politics and lack of infrastructure.

But honestly, if our aid has the potential to harm these people in the long run, it might be more generous to cancel all aid period, with the possible exception of specific disaster relief programs. (A sort of volunteer international insurance agency. ;-)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

---