Bush Lays off Congress

[Clocker]

I'm sure some of you will just love to jump all over this...

Bush Lays Off Congress; will Outsource Lawmaking to India
Reuters International Release


Washington - Citing the growing cost of running the Federal government
and the need to cut costs in order to reduce the budget deficit,
President Bush announced today that he was laying off all 535 members of
Congress and transferring lawmaking operations to a legislative support
center in Bangalore, India. "Hey, outsourcing is the way to go these
days," said Bush at an impromptu news conference where he announced the
decision, adding, "the American people want to see less government
waste. Since every one of those ex-Congressmen had a salary of $150,000,
this move will cut our costs by over $80 million per year, and that's
not even counting what we'll save on health insurance and retirement
plans." Sources indicate that the Indian replacements will be paid
approximately $250 per month.


However, the changes won't take effect immediatly, Bush said. "Members
of congress could remain on the job an extra 30 days if they agree to
train their replacements. If you think about it, this really frees
congress up. They now have the opportunity to seek better jobs elsewhere
in the economy.


It really is a win-win for both countries," he went on to say.
The outcry from the newly laid-off Senators and Representatives was
swift.
Ex-California Senator Diane Feinstein said, "This is absolutely
outrageous. How can a bunch of replacements over in India run Congress?
What do they know about filibusters and committee hearings?" As she was
being escorted out of the Hart Senate Office Building by U.S. Capitol
Police officers, Feinstein complained that the newly-terminated
lawmakers, those who chose not to train their replacements, were only
given ten minutes to clean out their desks and leave the building.


"I think it's a great idea," said Vice President Dick Cheney, speaking
from a secure undisclosed location. "The American people were fed up
with that expensive do-nothing Congress which didn't always give the
President everything he asked for. Our new Indian replacements will be
much more cooperative to the President, which is what we all want."


Asked whether the outsourcing may be unconstitutional, Cheney noted,
"That's up to the Supreme Court to decide, but as you know, they usually
see things our way."


The new members of Congress seem thrilled with the attention they are
receiving. Speaking from the offices of All-India Legislative Support
Centre Ltd. in Bangalore, new Mississippi Senator Ramchandra Shekar
Gupta told reporters, "The Indian people are very hard working and we
will do our best as U.S. Congressmen and Congresswomen. And we are going
to have some Fun too. Just think: we have $2 trillion of the American
taxpayers' money to spend!"

 

[blakerwry]

;-)

 

[blakerwry]

i was talking with a guy today who was complaining about the outsourcing. He works for a major US based company that I'm sure everyone has bought products from. Anyway, he was talking about the poor quality of the products that had been outsourced to asia. He said that they were so bad that they were not sellable and were "falling apart before they even arrived to the shippinging centers in the US"

We both agreed that all this outsourcing is going to turn around and bite eveeryone in the ass.

 

[P5-133XL]

Why can't we out-source George W. - It would save far more dollars than everyone in congress combined. The money gained from not being an occuping power and having to reconstruct Iraq and Afganistan would be soooo nice and that doesn't include the real savings from the fact that He is an ecconomic idiot (non-savant) steadfastly striving to destroy our economy.

Let the flaming begin

 

[Mercutio]

Wow. Pretty bad when the normally even-handed Mark is making such partisan comments. Just the same, I agree completely.

Early today, George Bush said that he "wouldn't leave security of America in the hands of a madman." All I could think when I heard that was, "Well, why doesn't George just resign then."

In other Bush related news, we're just over two years since the Energy policy meetings where Dick Cheney discussed price controls with senior executives from Enron. He hasn't been seen much in public since, nor has he surrendered his notes pertaining to that meeting. Funny how we don't hear much about that, isn't it? Especially since Republicans spent SIX YEARS investigating Whitewater.

If only the left in this country would get its act together...

 

[Clocker]

LOL And to think Pavlov needed a bell.....

:lol:

 

[Mercutio]

Among George Bush's failures in his unelected tenure as president is the proud accomplishment of a net loss of 3 million jobs over the 3 years of his administration.

The last executive to preside over a net loss of jobs during the course of his administration was Herbert Hoover, whose term spanned the first years of the Great Depression (1929 - 1933) and the Dust Bowl years of the American West, which, as excuses go, aren't bad ones.

Yes, my contempt, scorn and pity for Mr. Bush are reflexive. I'd like to think I'd feel the same way when confronted with any other great evil.

 

[Clocker]

Yes Merc. You are absolutely correct. Everything that has happened to the US and the economy is soley because of GWB. In a measily 3 years he has managed to destroy the US economy and put millions of people out of work. It has nothing to do with the president who was in office for the 8 years before him, or the fact that the stock market got way ahead of itself during his administration because of his failure to prevent companies from cooking the books, overstate earnings and basically lie to the world about their profitability. It also didn't have anything to do with the Tech bubble that burst because of investor 'irrational exuberance'. 9/11 didn't help either but I'm not sure how big the effect of it was. Nonetheless, I think it's the result of Hillary's bitch Bill not having the gonads to take on Bin Ladin and his crew head on. The USS Cole, US bases attacked, embassies attacked all with no effective response from Bill. I'm sure he was a real confidence builder for the terrorists and he should have done more to prevent something like 9/11 which not only killed thousands but had a huge effect on us in many ways. It didn't have anything to do with Clinton, it is all Bush's fault.

I certainly can't say GWB is perfect but to blame the state of our country soley on his policies and not at all on Clinton's is just plain ignorant, IMO (and I know you're not ignorant!). The US economy has way too much inertia for it to get as messed up as it is now during only GWB's short time as president. He had a lot of help...

Peace.

 

[flagreen]

I think he's done a great job. I just sent another check into the Republican party on the 1st. I certainly plan on voting for him again next year. I suspect he will be re-elected fairly easily.

On tuesday night I saw Terry McCaulif (sp?) attributing Davis' ouster and Arnold's victory as being due to the U.S. economy. And that President Bush should take note of this. Seems like Terry's gotten the message out based on the responses here in this thread.

If the economy should turn around I wonder what you guys will say then?

I won't even go into the war on terrorism as I suspect that most of you fellows believe that giving the terrorists what they want is the best way to win that war. You guys should look into some of the Arab / Islamic forums around and get to know these people and what their goals, beliefs and aspirations are. You might change your opinion of Islam when you get a good look at what it really is.

 

[Santilli]

Well, I live in a country, Kalifornia, ravaged by facist-liberals, that, what a shock, destroyed the economy of the 6th largest country in the world, Kalifornia.

I really wonder how much control you want your congress to have over your business.

While I would not allow people to enter the United States to take american jobs, if I was in Congress, which the congress did, 400, 000 visas, which just shows congress was owned by special intrest groups.

Frankly, I think the real problem is too much time for the government to inact communist legislation.

Do a Texas, and limit government to 3 months work a year, and you would have much more what was intended by the founders.

gs

 

[blakerwry]

where exactly is the country of Kalifornia?

 

[P5-133XL]

where exactly is the country of Kalifornia?

You don't see it on maps because it is now scheduled for termination

 

[Mercutio]

Texas is a unique combination of rule by special interest. It has the weakest executive branch in the union, GS's aforementioned limitations on legislative sessions, and some very large businesses that are very interested in carving out their own special businessman's fiefdom inside the USA.
For all the excesses of California or New York (what I'd call "progressive" states), Texas is just as bad, but in a regressive manner.

Weakest consumer safety laws? Texas. Worst record on environmental issues? Texas. Least protection of employee's rights? Hey, that's Texas too! Texas has no state income tax! Not coincidently, it's right near the bottom of the barrel in terms of state services, and state funds are largely raised through such wonderfully regressive things as state sales taxes. Texas education reform? Remember "no child left behind?" - the program that supposedly led to ZERO dropouts in Houston school districts? Wanna know how they did it? It was easy. They didn't count the drop outs.
Texas is a magical land where the counties bordering the Rio Grande, if they were a seperate state in the USA, would have the highest rates of poverty, infant mortality and illiteracy in the nation (not to mention the lowest percentage of homes with indoor plumbing in the country).
Oh yeah, and then there's criminal justice. I know most of the guys in prison are scumbags. That's a given. But STILL, no other nation in the Western world executes prisoners, and Texans proudly to boast that it has executed more inmates in the rest of the US put together. The mentally disabled? Children? Texas will kill 'em.

Maybe Mexico will give us Chiapas if we give Texas back.

To address Clocker, three years is more than enough time to effect a change in the situation.

What is George doing that might actually turn around the economy? What's he doing at all to indicate that he gives a rat's ass about the economy? When I compare the proportion of news about domestic policy coming out of the white house compared to the amount about Iraq and homeland security bullshit, it really makes me sick.

George II is just like his old man: He's out of touch on domestic issues (George Sr. was amazed after seeing a bar-code reader in a supermarket during his term in office), always has been, and he's more interested in doing favors for his friends than in running the country he theoretically governs.

Oh, and foreign policy? Senior administration staff make cracks about the potency of EU member nations AND negate the comments of the secretary of state. We're undergoing the Vietnamization of Afghanistan AND Iraq. Iran is looking at the way we're dealing with North Korea and trying DESPERATELY to get a nuke of its own, and our biggest non-Anglophonic ally in our last war ended up being Spain, a nation that I think has been irrelevant in matters martial pretty much since Nelson captured Villeneuve.

Fiscal policy? This guy ran TWO OIL COMPANIES into the ground. During the era when "Dallas" was the most popular show on TV (i.e. Texas oilmen can do anything!). Any wonder we're looking at record-setting deficits and he's complaining about the unfairness of the measely few hundred milllion the US government gets in estate taxes? I'll grant that it's possible for tax cuts to stimulate the economy but the tax cuts that were passed really HAVE benefitted the wealthy (people who are less likely to spend that money, thereby recirculating it in the economy which is, oddly enough, what causes growth). Besides, those tax cuts? The ones that were supposed to stifle recession? They were the exact same tax cuts Georgie proposed when we had a surplus. Exactly the same. You'd think they maybe could've dressed the package with a few more incentives for small business investments instead of an extra, temporary deduction for parents or the $300 one-time refund check.

Civil rights? John Ashcroft. Need I say more? Patriot Act? Have you heard of it? Unindicted detainees, post 9-11?

Environmental issues? Well, I'm sure that everyone had oil drilling in mind when all that space in Alaska was set aside for wildlife (not to mention similar proposals for the Rockies and IIRC the Pacific coastal regions).

What is it this guy is good at, again?

 

[Mercutio]

Texas is a unique combination of rule by special interest. It has the weakest executive branch in the union, GS's aforementioned limitations on legislative sessions, and some very large businesses that are very interested in carving out their own special businessman's fiefdom inside the USA.
For all the excesses of California or New York (what I'd call "progressive" states), Texas is just as bad, but in a regressive manner.

Weakest consumer safety laws? Texas. Worst record on environmental issues? Texas. Least protection of employee's rights? Hey, that's Texas too! Texas has no state income tax! Not coincidently, it's right near the bottom of the barrel in terms of state services, and state funds are largely raised through such wonderfully regressive things as state sales taxes. Texas education reform? Remember "no child left behind?" - the program that supposedly led to ZERO dropouts in Houston school districts? Wanna know how they did it? It was easy. They didn't count the drop outs.
Texas is a magical land where the counties bordering the Rio Grande, if they were a seperate state in the USA, would have the highest rates of poverty, infant mortality and illiteracy in the nation (not to mention the lowest percentage of homes with indoor plumbing in the country).
Oh yeah, and then there's criminal justice. I know most of the guys in prison are scumbags. That's a given. But STILL, no other nation in the Western world executes prisoners, and Texans proudly to boast that it has executed more inmates in the rest of the US put together. The mentally disabled? Children? Texas will kill 'em.

Maybe Mexico will give us Chiapas if we give Texas back.

To address Clocker, three years is more than enough time to effect a change in the situation.

What is George doing that might actually turn around the economy? What's he doing at all to indicate that he gives a rat's ass about the economy? When I compare the proportion of news about domestic policy coming out of the white house compared to the amount about Iraq and homeland security bullshit, it really makes me sick.

George II is just like his old man: He's out of touch on domestic issues (George Sr. was amazed after seeing a bar-code reader in a supermarket during his term in office), always has been, and he's more interested in doing favors for his friends than in running the country he theoretically governs.

Oh, and foreign policy? Senior administration staff make cracks about the potency of EU member nations AND negate the comments of the secretary of state. We're undergoing the Vietnamization of Afghanistan AND Iraq. Iran is looking at the way we're dealing with North Korea and trying DESPERATELY to get a nuke of its own, and our biggest non-Anglophonic ally in our last war ended up being Spain, a nation that I think has been irrelevant in matters martial pretty much since Nelson captured Villeneuve.

Fiscal policy? This guy ran TWO OIL COMPANIES into the ground. During the era when "Dallas" was the most popular show on TV (i.e. Texas oilmen can do anything!). Any wonder we're looking at record-setting deficits and he's complaining about the unfairness of the measely few hundred milllion the US government gets in estate taxes? I'll grant that it's possible for tax cuts to stimulate the economy but the tax cuts that were passed really HAVE benefitted the wealthy (people who are less likely to spend that money, thereby recirculating it in the economy which is, oddly enough, what causes growth). Besides, those tax cuts? The ones that were supposed to stifle recession? They were the exact same tax cuts Georgie proposed when we had a surplus. Exactly the same. You'd think they maybe could've dressed the package with a few more incentives for small business investments instead of an extra, temporary deduction for parents or the $300 one-time refund check.

Civil rights? John Ashcroft. Need I say more? Patriot Act? Have you heard of it? Unindicted detainees, post 9-11?

Environmental issues? Well, I'm sure that everyone had oil drilling in mind when all that space in Alaska was set aside for wildlife (not to mention similar proposals for the Rockies and IIRC the Pacific coastal regions).

What is it this guy is good at, again?

 

[Howell]

Yes Merc. You are absolutely correct. Everything that has happened to the US and the economy is soley because of GWB. In a measily 3 years he has managed to destroy the US economy and put millions of people out of work.

GWB still has a long way to go if he wants to match Hoover's responsibility for "the Dust Bowl years of the American West". :roll: Get crackin'.

Merc, the economists say that changes made during one presidental term usually do not show as results until the next term.

 

[Howell]

Yes Merc. You are absolutely correct. Everything that has happened to the US and the economy is soley because of GWB. In a measily 3 years he has managed to destroy the US economy and put millions of people out of work.

GWB still has a long way to go if he wants to match Hoover's responsibility for "the Dust Bowl years of the American West". :roll: Get crackin'.

Merc, the economists say that changes made during one presidental term usually do not show as results until the next term.

 

[fool]

where exactly is the country of Kalifornia?

Uber Alles ?

What is it this guy is good at, again?

fundraising?

 

[Santilli]

I don't really want to go into this. I feel just as strongly about Clinton, the darling of the bomb.

Screwing Monica, or almost screwing Monica, let's bomb Afganistan and get involved in Bosnia, supporting the Moslem side :roll:

If that doesn't work, let's let in refugees from Haiti, an island with a 90% AIDS problem.

I believe, as did the founding father's, that the less government, the better.
I think we are way over the top on both federal and state governments, and any solution that stops illegal laws being written, by the morons elected here, by the liberal-facists that live here, the better.

The reason I don't like government agencies is they are inefficent, and waste money. If congress has too much money, rather then giving it back to us, they give it to Africa, etc. which, is well, I can't post what I'm thinking here.

Suffice to say revolutions have started over the little difference England charged in 1776 and, my current 55% tax bracket.

gs

 

[jtr1962]

How about that aspirin factory in Sudan that Clinton bombed, not coincidentally at around the time his affair with Monica was coming out? I'm sure that endeared us to some of the people in that region.

And speaking of the environment, which Mercutio brought up in his reference to ANWR, why didn't Clinton do something to curb the explosion of SUVs that started during his administration? Was or was not Gore a big environmentalist? For any who can't figure it out, we wouldn't even care want goes on in Israel or Iraq if we didn't need oil from that region, and SUVs burn lots of oil.

I'm no big fan of Bush, but Clinton frankly turns my stomach. Both parties are so sold out to special interests it isn't even funny.

 

[Santilli]

Politicians, as a general rule, are the lowest form of human life.

The less influence they have over your life, and the fewer laws, within a couple reasons, the better.

Looking to a politican to save a bad situation is like trying to win money in Las Vegas: the odds are seriously against you.
gs

 

[Mercutio]

Screwing Monica, or almost screwing Monica, let's bomb Afganistan and get involved in Bosnia, supporting the Moslem side :roll:

Yeah, I'm sure it would've been much better if we'd backed the guys committing systematic rapes and acts of genocide.

If that doesn't work, let's let in refugees from Haiti, an island with a 90% AIDS problem.

The US has a history of intervention in Haiti. Every time we do, we screw up. Things just get worse and worse. Those people that fled Haiti are at least in part our responsibility.

I believe, as did the founding father's, that the less government, the better.
I think we are way over the top on both federal and state governments, and any solution that stops illegal laws being written, by the morons elected here, by the liberal-facists that live here, the better.

Since the Reagan administration, there has been a movement among some right-wing intellectuals (cripes that's an oxymoronic phrase!) seeking to increase the federal debt to the point where the US goverment cannot pay it, with the hope that it the financial crisis would ultimately cause such a contraction in the size of the government that all the entrenched New Deal/Great Society social programs that the right wing is so fond of hating would vanish almost without debate.

Does knowing that make you feel better?

The reason I don't like government agencies is they are inefficent, and waste money. If congress has too much money, rather then giving it back to us, they give it to Africa, etc. which, is well, I can't post what I'm thinking here.

The US gives less in foreign aid as a percentage of GNP than any industrialized nation in the world. IIRC Finland or Norway is first place there. We give lots of military aid. We're first in that department. The three biggest recipients are all brutal regimes that probably shouldn't have any more guns: Israel, Egypt and Columbia.

Inefficient government agencies are very often the only way to get things done. If our postal system was always private (right now its semi-private), don't you see that there would've been places where CapitalistPost never would've delivered mail? What about Rural Electrification? Can you imagine what life would be like without the FCC, FTC or FDA?

And speaking of the environment, which Mercutio brought up in his reference to ANWR, why didn't Clinton do something to curb the explosion of SUVs that started during his administration?

President Clinton was a pragmatic politician for whom union members were a core constituency. The big 3 auto manufacturers have a powerful lobby in Washington. 2.5 mile an hour bumpers? And look at how long and hard they fought airbags. What group made sure SUVs were counted as "work vehicles" and therefore not subject to automobile emissions regulations to being with? Not only that, but as such popular vehicles, a fairly large chunk of the general public was driving them.

Politically speaking, if Clinton had taken on SUVs, he would've lost. He would've appeared ineffectual and would've had even less political capital for whatever else might've been on his agenda.

Gore IS an environmentalist. Read the Amazon.com review of "Earth in the Balance" (the customer reviews tend to be a wee bit partisan. Just a tad.) Gore was invited to testify before congress about environmental regulation at one point. Not as a congressman, but as an expert witness.
He's not a dummy. Unlike some unelected leaders of first world nations.

Now, whether he would've done anything about SUVs, I don't know. We'll never know.

 

[Mercutio]

''If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier -- so long as I'm the dictator.'' --George W. Bush

"I'm the commander -- see, I don't need to explain -- I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." --George W Bush

"There ought to be limits to freedom" --George W Bush

... and one from daddy, just because it further illustrates the family's attitudes:
"I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H. W. Bush

 

[blakerwry]

what a petty way to try an influence people merc. Using quotes out of context?



Also, i see that you said the US was one of the lowest coutries giving foreign aid... maybe you mean financial aid.... because we are the leading country in food aid(or whatever it is properly called). Maybe the US culture is a little different than most other countries. We don't like to spend our money if we don't know what it's being use for or we dont agree with its uses.

 

[Mercutio]

I'll be happy to provide context for any of the quotes above.

 

[Clocker]

what a petty way to try an influence people merc. Using quotes out of context?

If nothing else, it's amusing. :lol:

 

[Mercutio]

You really want our head of state saying things like "There ought to be limits to freedom"?

 

[blakerwry]

Your rights end where the other guy's nose begins. There should be limits to freedom. Should I be free to falsely advertise products, should I be free to steal other's property?

 

[Mercutio]

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: President-elect Bush and the four congressional leaders met for two hours.

PRESIDENT-ELECT GEORGE W. BUSH: I told all four that I felt like this election happened for a reason; that it pointed out-- the Delay in the outcome should make it clear to all of us-- that we can come together to heal whatever wounds may exist, whatever residuals there may be. And I really look forward to the opportunity. I hope they've got my sense of optimism about the possible, and enthusiasm about the job. I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's okay. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier... ( Chuckles ) ( laughter ) ...just so long as I'm the dictator. ( Laughter )

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Afterwards, all four congressional leaders said they believed that today's meeting was a good start. [snippage]

See? Herr Dipshit thinks it's funny.

"I'm the commander -- see, I don't need to explain -- I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." --George W Bush (no direct link here, this quote appeared in Woodward's Bush at War, in the context of a cabinet meeting)

"There ought to be limits to freedom"

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/bushweb602.html --George W Bush

... and one from daddy, just because it further illustrates the family's attitudes:

"I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H. W. Bush

http://bennyhills.fortunecity.com/hardy/203/nonbeliever/page50.html

 

[flagreen]

Well there should be limits to freedom don't you think?

 

[flagreen]

P.S. Now that the quote about being a dictator is in context it is obvious that he was only kidding. In fact he is somewhat echoing Lincolns famous letter to Hooker in which he promoted fighting Joe to commander of the Army of the Potomac despite Hooker having said that what the nation needed was a dictator. Lincoln told Hooker that he had promoted him not because of this statement but in spite of it because what the Union needed were victories, "give me victories and I'll risk the dictatorship" or words to that effect.

 

[Mercutio]

Well there should be limits to freedom don't you think?

In general, no, I don't think there should. That whole "Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness" thing.
In the context of parody web sites, certainly not. Unless GWB was somehow slandered or threatened - in which case he would have legal recourse, there's no reason to deny someone else his right to speech.

We have (mostly) very clear laws in place already about the differences between one man's freedom and the laws and standards of a community. GWB appears to me to be saying that those laws are not sufficient.

WRT the dictator quote, given the circumstances under which the fratboy-in-chief came to power, I don't think he has ever been in a position to joke about such things.

Lincoln was in a very different place during his time in office. Washington DC was effectively inside enemy territory, and he did have to suspend certain civil rights. Citizens rightly called "tyranny", and we know from his own correspondences how deeply that word pained him. We also know that at the end of the crisis, Lincoln did everything he could (in the time he had left) to restore the freedoms he might've damaged, something I don't see GWB ever doing.

 

[Howell]

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: President-elect Bush and the four congressional leaders met for two hours.

PRESIDENT-ELECT GEORGE W. BUSH: I told all four that I felt like this election happened for a reason; that it pointed out-- the Delay in the outcome should make it clear to all of us-- that we can come together to heal whatever wounds may exist, whatever residuals there may be. And I really look forward to the opportunity. I hope they've got my sense of optimism about the possible, and enthusiasm about the job. I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's okay. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier... ( Chuckles ) ( laughter ) ...just so long as I'm the dictator. ( Laughter )

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Afterwards, all four congressional leaders said they believed that today's meeting was a good start. [snippage]

See? Herr Dipshit thinks it's funny.

How to put this gentlly ... It's funny to people with a sense of humor. Is there anyone who thinks it's not easier to make decisions as a dictator rather than by commitee?

 

[Mercutio]

Yeah. Tee-Hee. It's fucking hilarious when the president-by-proclamation jokes about dictatorship. Almost as funny as all those slave labor jokes the Khmer Rouge used to tell.

 

[Mercutio]

Also, i see that you said the US was one of the lowest coutries giving foreign aid... maybe you mean financial aid....

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp

 

[flagreen]

Merc,

It is helpful to consider aid in dollar amounts rather than in percentages of GNP. Doing so on the page you linked to places the U.S. at the top of the list for 2002. The same is true for 2001.

The second and third highest donors for the past two years were Japan and Germany. Those two nations primarily rely upon the U.S. for their defense and as such do not have the need for large defense budgets. Therefore they should contribute a higher percentage than the U.S. does imo.

If we look at who contributes more to the world period (foreign aid, loan guarentees, defense, economic development through trade, private investment and donations, etc.) I don't think there is anyone who comes close to the U.S. nor has there been anyone close for many years.

 

[flagreen]

Also from further down the same page comes this interesting information -

Americans privately give at least $34 billion overseas -- more than three times U.S. official foreign aid of $10 billion:

International giving by U.S. foundations totals $1.5 billion per year
Charitable giving by U.S. businesses now comes to at least $2.8 billion annually
American NGOs gave over $6.6 billion in grants, goods and volunteers.
Religious overseas ministries contribute $3.4 billion, including health care, literacy training, relief and development.
$1.3 billion by U.S. colleges are given in scholarships to foreign students
Personal remittances from the U.S. to developing countries came to $18 billion in 2000
Source: Dr. Carol Aderman, Aid and Comfort, Tech Central Station, 21 August 2002. (Aderman admits that there are no complete figures for international private giving. Hence these numbers may be taken in caution, but even with caution, these are high numbers.)
(Unfortunately I have found it very difficult to find comparative figures for private donations from other regions.)

It is too bad they can't provide figures on private donations from other regions. Anyway I don't think we have anything to apologise for when it comes to doing our fair share to help the world.

 

[its.fubar]

I think it is outrageous that George W "B for buffoon" thinks he has any Chance of reelection next year, considering people cannot afford medicine in the USA without first going over to Canada where they can save up to 70 percent of their prescription cost.furthermore I do believe that you Americans will eventually realize that the far right conservative group only thinks about themselves and not America, consider the vast amount of CEO`s that are accused of criminal behavior in the USA today, I believe the number is 178 and still rising where 78 have already been convicted and don't forget these people come from the very large companies and how many more will go free from the smaller companies, I also believe the war in Iraq was a mistake without the United Nations backing but now you are there you must stay and finish the job and it will be extremely expensive, where far to many people will lose their lives or made invalids I hope you American people realize that you must take care of your war invalids better than what you did in the Vietnam war.

 

[Mercutio]

Sadly, the US is full of people who will vote for him, based on rhetoric about his made-up "war on terror" and his status as a "friend of bidness" and an anti-intellectual good-ol'-boy.

Speaking of Vietnam, the situation in Iraq seems to be heading more-and-more that way all the time. We'll occupy it for years to come, disallow actual self-government (here's a hint: the people of Iraq don't want to have a democracy) and pull out some years later, after hundreds of US soldiers are killed by suicide bombs and clever ambushes. It'll be the US's version of Belfast or the Gaza Strip.

Hey, anybody seen a WMD in Iraq?

 

[it's-fubar]

I think it is outrageous that George W "B for buffoon" thinks he has any Chance of reelection next year, considering people cannot afford medicine in the USA without first going over to Canada where they can save up to 70 percent of their prescription cost.furthermore I do believe that you Americans will eventually realize that the far right conservative group only thinks about themselves and not America, consider the vast amount of CEO`s that are accused of criminal behavior in the USA today, I believe the number is 178 and still rising where 78 have already been convicted and don't forget these people come from the very large companies and how many more will go free from the smaller companies, I also believe the war in Iraq was a mistake without the United Nations backing but now you are there you must stay and finish the job and it will be extremely expensive, where far to many people will lose their lives or made invalids I hope you American people realize that you must take care of your war invalids better than what you did in the Vietnam war.

I think it is outrageous that you have stolen my user name. Pathetic actually. Have you no originality? No sense of shame? Are you so hopelessly lost in that little world of yours that you have no identity of your own and must borrow the good name of others?

But I agree with you about Bush. He is a buffoon. Take his stance on abortion for instance. He is a right to life man. How bizaare that he cannot see the wisdom we Europeans so freely dispense to any and all who will listen. We are so noble. Why the simple presence of yourself in this glorious world of ours should be ample evidence to any rational man that sometimes abortions are sorely needed and are abundantly justified considering the consequences of carrying a child such as yourself to birth. As a partial-birth survivor yourself who is obviously still suffering from the effects of the proceedure you would no doubt agree with me that a timely scraping of the womb early on can save one from a great deal of suffering.

No doubt your children fantasize obsessively about euthanasia for the sick and elderly and are looking forward with glee to the day when they can exercise their right to put you out of your misery. And who could blame them? Yet this idiot "G for guache" W. Bush is against this too. The fool thinks it kills people or something.

Yes idiot Bush believes he knows better than we Europeans what is best for America. The nerve of this disgusting and gauche little man to simply ignore our advice. When will they ever learn that we know what is best for America?

 

[Mercutio]

The fool thinks it kills people or something.

Yet President Asstard has no problems sending our troops to foreign lands so they can engage in "low-intensity conflicts" that result in "high intensity body bags", and then has the nerve to address all his made-up terrorist hobgoblins and actual rogue nations with the words "Bring it on."

Oh yeah, and Mr. Right to Life had a great run with the Texas Execution Chamber, too.

For the record, I find it highly disturbing that other people believe they have the right to legislate my continued existance, beyond a date I might wish it to end, and that those same people think the world is a better place with more and more unwanted babies.