Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 51 of 51
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by tjd414
    skillllllz must be a lawyer (hey, skillllllz, I still like you though ) because he questions you like a defendant on the stand ... takes your logical points and then gets under your skin and gets you to head down the emotional side and has everyone on the jury pool just shaking thier heads.
    I must admit, that's a first. Although I'm fully aware of my abilities I've never heard them described in such a fashion. I will take it as a pure compliment.

    For those who care, please understand; I do not mearly make verbal assaults in vain. My tollerance, like everyone elses, has a threshold. Once crossed I will brashly point out your arrogance or illogical assumption. At that point, consider it an attempt to provide a "rude awakening" on your level. Feel free to return the favor.
    .
  2.    #42  
    how presumptuous! wow. and he talks about arrogance! how can you not laugh at this guy!
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    how presumptuous! wow. and he talks about arrogance! how can you not laugh at this guy!
    Simple, I agree with him.
  4.    #44  
    I would expect you to, you share his persuasions, if you will.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    Agree.
    Although I agree more-often-than-not with clulup, I disagree with him on the per capita issue. Per capita is a useful measurement to some extent but not in this case. It give the impression that all people give or should give. True, the U.S. is a superpower but MANY of its citizens live under poverty read, and read. Before per capita "givers" or "donators" is calculated, there's a need for per capita "under poverty" to be included, among other things.
    Besides, it is silly to focus on cold-calculations regarding donations. Instead, let's be THANKFUL to all of those (individuals, agencies, governments) who donated their time, effort, money, clothes, prayers and God knows what else: To help the needy in that region.
    I perfectly agree that pure per capita calculations can be misleading. It is not surprising for instance that populous but poor countries like egypt donate less on a per capita basis. This is precisely why the percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is used as a measure, and I mentioned both values.

    However, I don't agree that the per capita measure does not work in the US since there are many poor in the US. The many poor are compensated by very rich people, leading to one of the highest GDP per capita worldwide on average (sixth highest in the word if I remember correctly). So if the poor cannot give anything for understandable reasons, the rich should be able to compensate.

    The fact remains that the US donate comparatively little to foreign aid both on a per capita basis and even more so on a percentage of GDP basis. I only mentioned this because somebody claimed that Muslims don't donate as much as they should/could. I did not say the US are cheap or stingy or anything of that sort.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  6.    #46  
    "the fact remains that the US donate comparatively little to foreign aid both on a per capita basis and even more so on a percentage of GDP basis. I only mentioned this because somebody claimed that Muslims don't donate as much as they should/could. I did not say the US are cheap or stingy or anything of that sort. "

    that "somebody" would be me.
    I would like to know how japan measures up in regards to its donations on both a per capita basis as well as a percentage of GDP basis.
    while giving $500 million, is japan similarly donating very little in these terms of these measurements?
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    I would like to know how japan measures up in regards to its donations on both a per capita basis as well as a percentage of GDP basis.
    while giving $500 million, is japan similarly donating very little in these terms of these measurements?
    One has to keep apart general foreign aid and aid for the present tsunami catastrophe. You can look up general foreign aid e.g.
    here. In the tables, for each country you can find the absolute amounts and the percentage of the GDP (see "ODA/GNI", GNI is similar to GDP). You can also look up the population e.g. in Wikipedia and calculate the donations per capita if you wish.

    You can also check the contributions to tsunami aid by country and do the same calculations again if you like.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    "the fact remains that the US donate comparatively little to foreign aid both on a per capita basis and even more so on a percentage of GDP basis. I only mentioned this because somebody claimed that Muslims don't donate as much as they should/could. I did not say the US are cheap or stingy or anything of that sort. "

    that "somebody" would be me.
    I would like to know how japan measures up in regards to its donations on both a per capita basis as well as a percentage of GDP basis.
    while giving $500 million, is japan similarly donating very little in these terms of these measurements?
    Not that it really matters, but Japan gave about 10 times as much is you compare by GDP.
    Japan:
    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/ja.html
    GDP:
    purchasing power parity - $3.582 trillion (2004 est.)

    US:
    GDP:
    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/us.html
    purchasing power parity - $10.99 trillion (2004 est.)

    Now we know this useless trivia lets think about KypDurron's post and not abuse this natural disaster as a platform to promote our own political agenda.
    Please show some respect to those who lost families/friends or got hurt themselves.
    All donations are welcome, regardless of race, nationality religion, PDA useage etc.
    Lets let this desaster be a catalyst to a more united world, not an even more devided one.

    Originally I had this case closed, because all the personal attacks etc. but as a new years present I'll reopen it by request, however keep things civil or it will be closed straight away.
    Last edited by ToolkiT; 01/04/2005 at 06:16 AM.
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I perfectly agree that pure per capita calculations can be misleading. It is not surprising for instance that populous but poor countries like egypt donate less on a per capita basis. This is precisely why the percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is used as a measure, and I mentioned both values.

    However, I don't agree that the per capita measure does not work in the US since there are many poor in the US. The many poor are compensated by very rich people, leading to one of the highest GDP per capita worldwide on average (sixth highest in the word if I remember correctly). So if the poor cannot give anything for understandable reasons, the rich should be able to compensate.

    The fact remains that the US donate comparatively little to foreign aid both on a per capita basis and even more so on a percentage of GDP basis. ....
    Socialists prefer to use percentage of GDP numbers over actual totals because they're all about redistribution of wealth.

    Hey clulup....What's in your wallet?
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    "the fact remains that the US donate comparatively little to foreign aid both on a per capita basis and even more so on a percentage of GDP basis. I only mentioned this because somebody claimed that Muslims don't donate as much as they should/could. I did not say the US are cheap or stingy or anything of that sort. "

    that "somebody" would be me.
    I would like to know how japan measures up in regards to its donations on both a per capita basis as well as a percentage of GDP basis.
    while giving $500 million, is japan similarly donating very little in these terms of these measurements?

    To see what this really looks like in visual terms


    Source: OECD Web Site
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Socialists prefer to use percentage of GDP numbers over actual totals because they're all about redistribution of wealth.

    Hey clulup....What's in your wallet?
    I thought I was clear about not abusing this thread for your own political agenda, guess I was wrong..
    Either way, if people can't help themselves, I'll close this thread..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions