Terrorism in the London

[iago]

But that doeesn't make the person who gave $50 better than the person who gave $10.

Anyway, Denmark rocks!

Why not? He did more of a favor for the charity than the other. I don't like how you people feel that just because people have more money that they should be required to spend it frivolously.

If I had a million dollars in my bank account and gave away $1000, that wouldn't make me a good person.  I wouldn't even notice the difference. 

Perhaps it's because I haven't grown up rich like you that I feel that way :-/

[hismajesty]

I haven't grown up rich, but even if I had I don't understand why that would make any difference. My father works extremely hard for his money, and he sacrificese both his life and his body to continue to do so.

A millionaire donating $50 to a charity helps the charity more than a poor person donating $10. The poor person donating $10 is stupid, in my opinion. If he's poor he should be using that $10 to survive and try and make more money so he isn't poor anymore. My grandfather (according to my grandmother, although I don't know his actual net worth) is a first-generation millionaire. He isn't dropping thousands, or even hundreds, of dollars to help x charity. Why? Because the only thing he gets back from it is a negligible amount of money off when he pays taxes. The whole point is to make more money, not lose money. He grew up extremely poor with many brothers and sisters in a small house in a poorer section of town. My great-grandmother even put one brother up for adoption because they couldn't afford him. My great-grandfather (who I never met) was abusive and just overall not a nice person. My grandfather hated him and would stand in the mirror and promise himself that he would not be like his father. He knows what it is like to be poor, have a hard life, and what it is like to work hard for your money. He had to deliver papers, collect bottles, and do other forms of work just to be able to buy milk and bread for his family. He knows that money doesn't grow on trees, and it took him a long time to make it. He had planned on being a radio repairman or something like that, but ended up being a Master Chief in the US Coast Guard. What did he do will his paychecks? He saved them, he didn't spend them. He saved them and eventually was able to invest in real estate and stocks. It took him a long time, why would he just spend money carelessly and then perhaps lose it? You might be saying "it's only 1000" but that's still $1000 that could have been reinvested.

People like Bill Gates, or people who are multi-millionaires, or billionaires, can afford to do stuff like that because they know they'll have money left over. However according to The Millionaire Next Door most millionaires (over 80%, iirc) today (especially new money) drive American cars, wear inexpensive clothing, and don't go to dinner where plates cost $100 each. They aren't staying in lavish hotel suites or being in any way careless with their money. What do they do? They invest, to ensure that them and their family will be supported in the long run.

I think that's where you're getting confused. It's not just "oh, I have money, let me blow it on stuff." In my opinion, donating any amount of money to a charity is a noble move. I would prefer to look at the bigger picture, which is the charity getting the money it needs versus who is donating the money. I think you should stop focusing on your "greedy capitalists that don't care about anyone but themselves" idea of America. Would you rather somebody donate $50, even if he could afford more, or not donate any at all? Wanting someone to donate more just because they can is, in my opinion, just as greedy.

If you had a million dollars in your bank account, and you gave away $1000, you'd definitely notice the difference. Why? Because you wouldn't be a millionaire anymore.

Edit:

Sorry that this was long and kind of a ramble but I am pretty passionate about this topic, especially the way you said it. I can't explain it, it's just the way you look at things and it kind of ticked me off. I also felt that a personal example was needed to drive my point home instead of just general statements, as those hardly ever (never) work with you.

[Adron]

Your ideas about the millionaire and the poor student are interesting and somewhat understandable. When you look at countries such as the USA and Denmark, they're not just rich and poor though. You're really looking at different populations. If there are two groups of people, one is group A, 100 people, each giving $1, for a total of $100, and a group B, 10 people, each giving $5 for a total of $50... Who is more generous now?

The difference between the USA and Denmark in GDP per capita is Denmark being 25% lower. The difference in aid provided (from Arta's links) is much much larger, and so even re-weighted as generosity per population, USA isn't much of a giver.

[Topaz]

We have more than just a few assets. It's obvious, America being a global superpower. Why compare it to a dog?

[Arta]

... I assume you meant no offense to any Danes that might be reading...

[iago]

I haven't grown up rich, but even if I had I don't understand why that would make any difference. My father works extremely hard for his money, and he sacrificese both his life and his body to continue to do so.

A millionaire donating $50 to a charity helps the charity more than a poor person donating $10. The poor person donating $10 is stupid, in my opinion. If he's poor he should be using that $10 to survive and try and make more money so he isn't poor anymore. My grandfather (according to my grandmother, although I don't know his actual net worth) is a first-generation millionaire. He isn't dropping thousands, or even hundreds, of dollars to help x charity. Why? Because the only thing he gets back from it is a negligible amount of money off when he pays taxes. The whole point is to make more money, not lose money. He grew up extremely poor with many brothers and sisters in a small house in a poorer section of town. My great-grandmother even put one brother up for adoption because they couldn't afford him. My great-grandfather (who I never met) was abusive and just overall not a nice person. My grandfather hated him and would stand in the mirror and promise himself that he would not be like his father. He knows what it is like to be poor, have a hard life, and what it is like to work hard for your money. He had to deliver papers, collect bottles, and do other forms of work just to be able to buy milk and bread for his family. He knows that money doesn't grow on trees, and it took him a long time to make it. He had planned on being a radio repairman or something like that, but ended up being a Master Chief in the US Coast Guard. What did he do will his paychecks? He saved them, he didn't spend them. He saved them and eventually was able to invest in real estate and stocks. It took him a long time, why would he just spend money carelessly and then perhaps lose it? You might be saying "it's only 1000" but that's still $1000 that could have been reinvested.

People like Bill Gates, or people who are multi-millionaires, or billionaires, can afford to do stuff like that because they know they'll have money left over. However according to The Millionaire Next Door most millionaires (over 80%, iirc) today (especially new money) drive American cars, wear inexpensive clothing, and don't go to dinner where plates cost $100 each. They aren't staying in lavish hotel suites or being in any way careless with their money. What do they do? They invest, to ensure that them and their family will be supported in the long run.

I think that's where you're getting confused. It's not just "oh, I have money, let me blow it on stuff." In my opinion, donating any amount of money to a charity is a noble move. I would prefer to look at the bigger picture, which is the charity getting the money it needs versus who is donating the money. I think you should stop focusing on your "greedy capitalists that don't care about anyone but themselves" idea of America. Would you rather somebody donate $50, even if he could afford more, or not donate any at all? Wanting someone to donate more just because they can is, in my opinion, just as greedy.

If you had a million dollars in your bank account, and you gave away $1000, you'd definitely notice the difference. Why? Because you wouldn't be a millionaire anymore.

Edit:

Sorry that this was long and kind of a ramble but I am pretty passionate about this topic, especially the way you said it. I can't explain it, it's just the way you look at things and it kind of ticked me off. I also felt that a personal example was needed to drive my point home instead of just general statements, as those hardly ever (never) work with you.

Sorry, I wasn't thinking.  I was busy working full time while you were living in your beach house ;-)

[Hazard]

I wish I was at my beach house

[CrAz3D]

Great Danes?...punny (maybe)

Just saw a thing on CBS about Holland.  Some crazy SUPER critical man made a movie criticizing muslims & the koran, he got murdered.  They were saying how Holland is like THE most liberal nation in the world & that movie maker stomps on anything & everything people hold sacred & what not.  The idea for the movie was that of an ex?-muslim lady that is now apart of parliment.

Crazy that the most liberal nation in the world is also so VERY careful to stomp on everyone's feet...I would've thought they'd be all "people are good, I love everyone" instead of "haha, you believe in God, LOSER!"

[Topaz]

I wish I had a beachhouse

[CrAz3D]

I wish I've been to a beach
(that changes this weel, but still)

[Hazard]

Beach houses are nice. Anybody here is welcome to rent out our beach house (I'll even give you the 'friends' rate) if they're ever in the Tampa Bay area.*


*NOTE: Offer only applies to Republicans and Americans, so Adron and that British guy can take a hike. 

[iago]

Beach houses are nice. Anybody here is welcome to rent out our beach house (I'll even give you the 'friends' rate) if they're ever in the Tampa Bay area.*


*NOTE: Offer only applies to Republicans and Americans, so Adron and that British guy can take a hike. 

What if I live in America Junior?

[dxoigmn]

Sorry, I wasn't thinking.  I was busy working full time while you were living in your beach house ;-)

I think it also has to be pointed out that this is the same kid who ran up his dad's credit card and then asked us to click on links so he could pay it off.

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

OK. How about this one:

dxoigmn, or any of your compadres, give me a concrete, documented example OTHER than the Gulf Wars in which the US severely meddled in Middle Eastern affairs, that does not involve copious usage of subjective opinions disguised as facts.

Seriously, please provide this. I'd like to know.

[hismajesty]

Sorry, I wasn't thinking. I was busy working full time while you were living in your beach house ;-)

I think it also has to be pointed out that this is the same kid who ran up his dad's credit card and then asked us to click on links so he could pay it off.

It was my credit card. And iago, way to go, ignoring the entire point of my post just to spit out a witty insult. Great way to debate.

All this is really unrelated (beach houses, etc.) The entire point of my post was that regardless of who is giving the money, people had to work hard for it. You shouldn't be saying "well, just because the US has more people they should be giving more than they already are." The US could simply hold all of the money back and not give any out in foreign aid, how would you like that? I mean, we have plenty of problems within the country (homeless children, poverty, etc.) that the money could be used for. Why don't you, iago, write letters to your government and request that they appropriate more funds to foreign aid? Same for you Adron. Don't criticize the United States for donating less than could if you're going to ignore the fact that most countries that donate do donate less than what they could afford. It's obvious that you're supposed to be looking out for your own above all.