$845 billion to decrease world poverty at US taxpayer's expense

@clrumfelt (5437)
United States
July 27, 2008 4:46pm CST
Should Americans have to foot the bill to reduce global poverty, to the tune of $2,500 for each man woman and child? It seems such a bill is in the works now, having already been passed by the House of Representatives and ready for consideration by the US Senate. One concern of those opposing the bill is that it would make US tax dollars subject to UN authority. How do you feel about this? Here is a link to the news item: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=70308
6 people like this
13 responses
@irishidid (8724)
• United States
27 Jul 08
This and other stupid things being thought up by our government is why I'm voting republican this coming election and I'm pretty darn wary about doing that.
4 people like this
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
27 Jul 08
It's awful to feel you are voting for the lesser of two evils, but the candidates I truly supported didn't make it through the primaires, so I guess I am in the same boat as you, trying to vote in the candidate I feel will do the country the least damage. Thanks for your comments.
3 people like this
@TessWhite (3147)
• United States
28 Jul 08
Why is it the US has to be responsible for the entire planet? We are one of the newest countries, yet we feel we have to support the whole world. What about our own people? I know I am struggling to survive. Every month its like russian roulette deciding who gets paid and who gets to wait til next month. I think its high time we had a government who looked at its citizen's survival more than the rest of the world. And I'm sorry, but some of those "foreign countries" that are starving maybe wouldn't be in such sad shape if they would practice SOME form of birth control that is frequently offered to them. Now I understand helping out in disaster situations, but then again - what country out there offered US help when we had Katrina two years ago? No one to my knowledge. I get so fed up with our government feeling we must feed the world why we let our own people go homeless and hungry.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
28 Jul 08
I agree completely. It is just wrong to support other countries and not take care of our own people. We already are helping them, but it seems to never be enough somehow. Uncle Sam's pockets are not that deep to support the USA and the whole world as well.
@suspenseful (40316)
• Canada
28 Jul 08
This is not right. It is all right for people to donate money through their churches or other organizations and for that they will get charitable deductions but this seems not only a tax grab, but to lower the standard of living for all Americans, and they will not get a deduction for their charity. I gather that the Democrats in Congress feel that America must be punished for its prosperity. And the UN should not be in control of the United States nor of any other country. That would make it the government of the world and that would be disaster.
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
28 Jul 08
I agree. Any kind of forced charitable giving of this sort not only violates our constituation, it will impoverish America and not really help the other impoverished areas of the world a lot. I'm thinking Obama would pour these funds into one area of the world instead of spreading them out to many areas. Perhaps he is attempting to honor campaign promised to voters from another nation(s).
• United States
27 Jul 08
I can not with mere words express how incredibly stupid it is to merely throw almost a billion dollars at poverty and expect anything to happen other than to make some corrupt politicians very rich. Especially when there is a better way. Want to cure poverty? Forever? For real? Listen now to the words of John F. Kennedy. "The best form of welfare is a good job." Yes, it is true. JFK said this. What does it mean? It means that if government insures businesses have an honest, fair, competitive, free market place without corrupt politicians, excessive taxes, over regulation, and anti competitive monopolies, oligarchies, and interlocking directorites to contend with, there would be no poverty as there would be enough employment for everyone.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
28 Jul 08
Good quote. I agree with John F. Kennedy that the best way to help nations get out of poverty is to help them get on their feet politically and ecomomically (exactly what the USA is doing in Iraq, and it is working.) Thanks for your comments.
• United States
27 Jul 08
Do these politicians even know who their constituents are? Do they not see the huge numbers of homeless people, desperately poor people who work hard, but don't make enough, and those who are losing everything in this Recession? Do they think all those thousands of people walked away from their homes out of boredom to let the banks foreclose? Could they possibly expect schools to continue to raise standards with lower pay, no supplies and fewer opportunities, due to budget cuts? Take care of the whole world? Of course! But charity begins at home. We need to support Americans more before sending money to others.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
27 Jul 08
I'm starting to understand what Obama meant in his overseas tour when he told the the people of Eruope he is a "citizen of the world." He wants to take the resources of the American people and instead of using them to improve our lives, to give them away to other countries.
2 people like this
@fwidman (11515)
• United States
27 Jul 08
Might be cheaper to keep them alive than to kill them off, which America seems so hell bent on doing to so many people around the globe. Who cares if the U.N. is the authority there? Don't we control the U.N. anyways? Sure seemed that way when the U.N. told us NOT to go to Iraq!
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
29 Jul 08
Sorry, I don't answer to the U.N. and I refuse to recognize any authority they think they may hold over me.
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
28 Jul 08
We need to be very wary of a presidential candidate who would recommend that American dollars be given to the UN for them to decide how to distribute them. Until we elimiate poverty in the US, our tax dollars should not be being going to help world poverty. If Barak is so concerned about world poverty, why not find a way to give Americans more tax relief for giving to charities that help in that regard. Personally, I would trust a charity to get the money and food where it is needed over any government or UN group. So often, corrupt governments all over the world intercept money and food that is supposed to be going to the poor.
2 people like this
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
28 Jul 08
It appears Obama is a "citizen of the world" bent on putting the US tax dollars and laws under control of the UN. It is just plain wrong for him to sponsor this legislation and just plain scary to think of him succeeding with it.
@Smith2028 (797)
• United States
28 Jul 08
Once Again, US Taxpayers fall victim to a liberal congress that is lead by people who firmly believe that we should take money from the people and give it to others. There is no reason, no justification for the US to be footing the bill to decrease the poverty rate in the world. The UN is a worthless organization who's only effectiveness is their highly effective way of squandering money away.
2 people like this
@clrumfelt (5437)
• United States
28 Jul 08
"The US Taxpayers fall victim to a liberal congress." I wonder how long it will take the liberal voters of the USA to realize their liberal politicians are in truth vicitmizing the American people they claim to serve and protect.
@34momma (13893)
• United States
28 Jul 08
That for is kind of a loaded question. are responsible for each other, of course we are. are responsible to make sure each other are eating and have some place to live, of course we are. Do we have to go broke doing it? I would have to say no. I think it's important that we take care of each other, but i also think that we should do what we can, and not be forced to give a certain amount
2 people like this
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
29 Jul 08
Sure, why not, lets all go with out even more so we can give even more money to people who hate us. We are after all the most evil nation on earth and should make ammends by spending even more money to hand crates of aid suplies to people wearing Bin Laden t-shirts. WTF!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is just another example of Obama's socialist/globalist views.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
29 Jul 08
Ok, idea here, why don't we take the 20% of the U.N. funding we provide and instead donate that to fight world poverty?
1 person likes this
@Uroborus (910)
• Canada
28 Jul 08
The idea that this bill will end world poverty is a joke. What you are talking about is a bill that will increase the US's contribution to world aid. Even with this increase, the US will be one of the least contributors to world aid. On a per-capita basis, many other contries give far more than the US.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14128)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
29 Jul 08
OMG! your joking right?
1 person likes this
@Hatley (164338)
• Garden Grove, California
28 Jul 08
clrumfelt hi I feel that we should first reduce the poverty in our own nation.After we have done that then think about helping others. I think reduing world poverty should be a joint venture with the other world powers, why shouldwe have to do this all by ourselves?
@twoey68 (13651)
• United States
11 Nov 09
Actually, I think before we go off fighting global poverty, we need to fight the poverty in the US. There are ppl right here in the US that don't have food, medical, water, electric or even a place to live. I know it's nice to help others but we need to take care of our own first. [b]~~I AM WHO I AM~~ **STANDING STRONG IN MY BELIEFS**[/b]