U.S. Can Make A Difference At G-8 On World Hunger

[mattskramer]

Why is the US the only country that can make a difference? WHy aren't some of the other countries in the world doing something? If this is such an important issue, why are they waiting for the US to take the lead and do something? Shouldn't they be doing something on their own?

Other nations do give. Yet, there is a difference. In whole dollars America gives much money to other nations when compared to other charitable nations. Yet, as a percentage of America’s wealth, we give very little when compared to other nations.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4836525

Other nations tried to help American victims.

 

[Gungnir]

Specifically to Swamp Fox, the OP set up a condition where only the US could act as it is American land that needs replanting.

 

[DiamondDave]

Can somebody show me where in the Constitution it says we need to worry about feeding an ungreatful world? Why should we hand out food to a world who goes around bad mouthing us 24/7? Seems to me must of the world can't wait to see the US fall, I guess once were gone they will finally figure out how to feed themselves.

Precisely...

The uber-left thinking of more wealth redistribution for popularity

'Oh... the other would like us and do nothing bad if we would just GIVE them more'.... utter hogwash

The leftists have no concept of personal responsibility at an individual scale, so why would they have it on a global scale???

And as for 'profiting off the misery of others'..... nice sloganeering... but it is nothing more than that... we have the FREEDOM (you see, because we will never come under the socialist/totalitarian control these uber-lefties want) to derive our profits, in our free market society, where our efforts are needed and where our goods can be bought

 

[Swamp Fox]

I still don't see how feeding the world is my responsibility. Maybe some of those rich hollywood types should share some of their wealth and quit volunteering mine.

I always laugh when I see those commericals crying, "Won't you please give?" and the spokesperson looks like she just stuffed her face full of twinkies. Always makes me wonder how many people she could feed if she stopped the twinkie habit.

 

[Gungnir]

Maybe some of those rich hollywood types should share some of their wealth and quit volunteering mine.

Here here!!!

 

[mattskramer]

Precisely...

The uber-left thinking of more wealth redistribution for popularity

'Oh... the other would like us and do nothing bad if we would just GIVE them more'.... utter hogwash

The leftists have no concept of personal responsibility at an individual scale, so why would they have it on a global scale???

And as for 'profiting off the misery of others'..... nice sloganeering... but it is nothing more than that... we have the FREEDOM (you see, because we will never come under the socialist/totalitarian control these uber-lefties want) to derive our profits, in our free market society, where our efforts are needed and where our goods can be bought

Silly extreme rhetoric. Of course the left understand personal responsibility. Yet, it also understands that there are severely mentally handicapped and physically handicapped people who will never be self-reliant. There are also those who temporarily fall on hard times through practically no foreseeable fault of their own.

What would you have them do if they know of no private charity and have no friends or family members willing to help them out? Let’s remove all safety nets, on matter how close to the ground they may be. Remove every red cent from food stamps, WIC, assisted housing programs, temporary welfare programs, Medicare, Medicaid, and each and every tax supported help. Too bad. If someone falls on hard times, then it is just too bad. Get out of my way and go die in the street somewhere.

The issue is not whether or not to draw the line – but where to draw the line.

 

[mattskramer]

Maybe some of those rich hollywood types should share some of their wealth and quit volunteering mine.

They do.

I always laugh when I see those commericals crying, "Won't you please give?" and the spokesperson looks like she just stuffed her face full of twinkies. Always makes me wonder how many people she could feed if she stopped the twinkie habit.

Preachers strike me that way much more so.

 

[Gungnir]

What would you have them do...

I'd suppose I give them some of my money, food, or other assistance.

Do these people live in the middle of Alaska?

 

[mattskramer]

I'd suppose I give them some of my money, food, or other assistance.

Do these people live in the middle of Alaska?

Some of the needy and hungry live practically in our own back yard.

http://www.hungerinamerica.org/expo...he_study/FinalHungerStudyExecutiveSummary.pdf

For help with people in foreign nations, I like the Americares organization.
It has very little overhead.

Home - AmeriCares International- AmeriCares

 

[BrianH]

This will not solve the homeless and hunger problem...but I think it's a very good start that should be adopted by every state.

http://dnr.state.il.us/orc/wildlife/virtual_news/releases/champions_of_wildlifea.htm

"Feeding the homeless
Each year, hunters help to feed the homeless by donating more than 10,000 pounds of venison through the Illinois Sportsmen Against Hunger program.

"Illinois DNR believes that with careful, responsible and humane stewardship, wildlife can be managed as valuable, renewable natural resources to benefit society and wildlife," says Bluett. "The contributions of hunters and trappers are key to successful wildlife conservation."

Many fisherman and hunters have large quantities of meat that they deep freeze and end up not using. Unfortunately I've done so myself a time or two. I've had so much meat in the freezer that I couldn't possibly eat it all. In cases such as this, I usually give sausage to my friends or pass the meat out to other members of the family. But for all those hunters who "shoot for the horns" and care nothing for the meat, I think it's a good thing to give the mat to the hungry.

 

[Taomon]

Precisely...

The uber-left thinking of more wealth redistribution for popularity

'Oh... the other would like us and do nothing bad if we would just GIVE them more'.... utter hogwash

The leftists have no concept of personal responsibility at an individual scale, so why would they have it on a global scale???

And as for 'profiting off the misery of others'..... nice sloganeering... but it is nothing more than that... we have the FREEDOM (you see, because we will never come under the socialist/totalitarian control these uber-lefties want) to derive our profits, in our free market society, where our efforts are needed and where our goods can be bought

Wrong! You have the whole issue wrong!

Look at Haiti. They have farms, they have agriculture. The produce is shipped out of the country to wealthy client states like America and England instead of being available as a cheap resource to the populace of Haiti. The wealthy classes there profit well from American investors and companies that tap those resources. The lower classes are starving. They cannot afford rice.

No one said anything about wealth redistribution. All I have said is that we do not need to step on the necks of the poor to gain a profit.

Money can still be made and we can allow poor people to of the regions we exploit to benefit from those resources. It's like ExxonMobil bragging about record high profits while we are fleeced at the pump and people of the Middle East are slaughtered.

 

[DiamondDave]

Silly extreme rhetoric. Of course the left understand personal responsibility. Yet, it also understands that there are severely mentally handicapped and physically handicapped people who will never be self-reliant. There are also those who temporarily fall on hard times through practically no foreseeable fault of their own.

What would you have them do if they know of no private charity and have no friends or family members willing to help them out? Let’s remove all safety nets, on matter how close to the ground they may be. Remove every red cent from food stamps, WIC, assisted housing programs, temporary welfare programs, Medicare, Medicaid, and each and every tax supported help. Too bad. If someone falls on hard times, then it is just too bad. Get out of my way and go die in the street somewhere.

The issue is not whether or not to draw the line – but where to draw the line.

The majority of the leftist handouts do NOT go to only those who cannot take care of themselves... but those who WILL NOT take care of themselves or CHOOSE NOT TO take care of themselves....

PROMOTE the GENERAL welfare... not PROVIDE the INDIVIDUAL welfare

If it is our choice to GIVE VOLUNTARILY, great... I support it fully... applaud those who give of themselves to help others with a leg up.... but that is not the job of government... government is not mommy handing out an allowance even if you did not take out the trash and mow the lawn...

And the great thing too about voluntary charitable giving... is you get to CHOOSE those who you wish to support... if you don't want free drug needles for criminal druggies, or condoms for kids, or corporate bailouts, or whatever other government handouts are being given... you don't HAVE to give to those... centralize your voluntary giving to the causes that are close to your heart... I personally give to American Diabetes Association, a local charity that trains to mentally retarded to live on their own, St. Jude's, and various other charities that I believe are worthwhile... and I know the % of $ given to those charities is almost totally used for the charity and not a ton of red tape and organizational costs...

 

[DiamondDave]

Wrong! You have the whole issue wrong!

Look at Haiti. They have farms, they have agriculture. The produce is shipped out of the country to wealthy client states like America and England instead of being available as a cheap resource to the populace of Haiti. The wealthy classes there profit well from American investors and companies that tap those resources. The lower classes are starving. They cannot afford rice.

No one said anything about wealth redistribution. All I have said is that we do not need to step on the necks of the poor to gain a profit.

Money can still be made and we can allow poor people to of the regions we exploit to benefit from those resources. It's like ExxonMobil bragging about record high profits while we are fleeced at the pump and people of the Middle East are slaughtered.

Ahhh... never a leftist stance without the socialist power of allowance and 'taking'...

And maybe you should actually look at the amount per gallon the oil companies actually make.. and step back and see how much various levels of government make... record profits when consumption worldwide is at record levels.. imagine that ...

It is your far left views that are wrong and need to be looked at again... grow up

 

[Swamp Fox]

They do.

Sure they do, that's why they fly around the globe in G5 airplanes and buy $5k bracelets for themselves and have more expensive toys then anyone else. If they really care that much, sell the extra house in Malibu, the condo in NY, the airplane, etc. Then I'll think they mean it.

Preachers strike me that way much more so.

That's why I don't give my money to the church either.

 

[mattskramer]

Sure they do, that's why they fly around the globe in G5 airplanes and buy $5k bracelets for themselves and have more expensive toys then anyone else. If they really care that much, sell the extra house in Malibu, the condo in NY, the airplane, etc. Then I'll think they mean it.

They give - perhaps not enough to satisfy you. Do you think that the rich should give more just because they have more? - that sounds a bit liberal.

Celebrity Generosity: Which Celebrities Actually Give Away Portions of Their Fortune - Associated Content

Jackie Chan reportedly donated $100, 00 to Chrysalis, a Los Angeles-based charity fighting homelessness. He also donated $64, 000 to UNICEF to aid in the tsunami relief effort.

Celine Dion made a contribution of one million dollars to aid with the hurricane Katrina effort.

Nicholas Cage also gave away one million dollars to the Katrina effort.

Sandra Bullock shared one million dollars with the American Red Cross after Sept. 11th, and another million for aid in tsunami relief in December 2004.

Paul McCartney and Heather Mills donated 1.9 million dollars for aid after the tsunami, in addition to tirelessly advocating the Adopt-A-Landmine charity.

Steven Spielberg bestowed 1.5 million for the tsunami effort, and another 1.5 million for aid of hurricane Katrina.

Angelina Jolie has donated over $3 million of her personal wealth to United Nations Refugee Agency, in addition to being their goodwill ambassador since 2001. She and Brad Pitt reportedly recently funded a medical facility in the Sudan.

In 2001, Arnold Schwarzenegger evidently shared 15 percent of his entire income that year, totaling $4.1 million to various charities including the Nelson Mandela children's fund and the Twin Towers fund.

No list of generous celebrities is complete without mentioning Oprah Winfrey, reportedly having donated $52 million of her own money in 2005 only to various charities including her own and the Hurricane Katrina effort.

 

[mattskramer]

The majority of the leftist handouts do NOT go to only those who cannot take care of themselves... but those who WILL NOT take care of themselves or CHOOSE NOT TO take care of themselves....

Proof? Link?

 

[DiamondDave]

Proof? Link?

Show me a link of PROOF then that the majority of welfare recipients are incapable of taking care of themselves. (see, that can go both ways Sparky) Meaning they are physically or mentally impaired to the point where they CANNOT do anything for themselves to earn a living.

The FACT is the that majority of recipients are quite capable but unwilling to take the personal responsibility or do what it takes. The lazy that feed the liberal power system that keeps the handouts coming.

 

[mattskramer]

Show me a link of PROOF then that the majority of welfare recipients are incapable of taking care of themselves. (see, that can go both ways Sparky) Meaning they are physically or mentally impaired to the point where they CANNOT do anything for themselves to earn a living.

The FACT is the that majority of recipients are quite capable but unwilling to take the personal responsibility or do what it takes. The lazy that feed the liberal power system that keeps the handouts coming.

I made no such statistical claim, Sparky. You made a statistical claim.
Therefore it is your responsibility to prove YOUR accusation. I'll wait.

 

[Charles_Main]

My mother in Law is a blind welfare recipient, and she abuses the system bad. She has help jobs in the past, and is capable of doing so now, and chooses not to.

 

[Taco]

Whoa.

Natural carrying capacity? Is it "natural" for us to gobble up a massively disproportionate percentage of world fuel supplies? What's "natural" about people dying from political conflicts?

Yes, you have the choice to be evil and selfish, and it seems to suit some of you fine.

But if you have no respect for human life, expect me to have no respect for your wallet as a push for your money to be used to help the suffering. I mean, nothing else in life really is nearly as important, but some of you will never get it.