Dr Grump
Platinum Member
It seems to me that contrary to what you are claiming, the US ponies up more than its share, (Yes, more.), of costs. On the other hand, the august body of the UN is nearly always attempting to 'check' read 'block' all actions that may be beneficial to US
In actual monies, yes, the US gives the most (I think). In per head of population? No, it does not.
Your last point is an interesting one and I have an observation from someone who is outside your borders. Down here, and in Australia, Canada and some European countries it <i>seems</i> that when we do something in our own interests, we do take the affect of others into account. For example, it might be better for us to put tariffs on fruit from the Pacific Islands to protect our own markets, but in a true free trading environment, it is inherently unfair on the Islands, and it affects their economy, which vicariously affects ours. We get more Islanders immigrating to NZ due to lack of job opportunities in their primary industries and they put a huge cost on us because most are unskilled and quite a few end up on the dole (your welfare0. So, when making such decsions our govts seem to weigh up the costs and benefits. What I'm trying to say here is, we just don't do it because it is in our interests and that's the bottom line. Now, with the US, it seems different. It seems you guys do things in your own interest and damn the consequences. That is the impression we get. I think it is a cultural thing. In the US there is a strong sense of "Survival of the fittest" with not many backstops. Or if there are backstops, they're minimal and demeaning to those who need them. I think sometimes your politicians take that to the international stage and we just don't like it. What you guys see as socialism, we see as giving our fellow humans a helping hand. And please do not confuse a helping hand with just helping those to lazy to help themselves. They are just as detested in our society as they are in yours.
That's my two cents worth ...:O)