U.N. official slams U.S. as 'stingy' over aid - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - December 28, 2004
U.N. official slams U.S. as 'stingy' over aid - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - December 28, 2004
Once again we see the contempt of the UN. The US is hated for our wealth and success. We offer more aid to more disaster hit areas of the world (and for all of you liberals out there aid=charity) and it is never enough.
For many US critics around the world, only the economic devestation of our country will make them happy. They want us to beg for assitance from them, to need them. They resent the fact that we don't.
They have the audacity to suggest that we raise taxes so that "...there would be more available if taxes were raised".
And to further show their greed, jealousy and resentment they say:
"There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy," he said, adding that politicians in the United States and Europe "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."
Taxpayers in our country are FREE to give as much over their already too high tax burden as they would like. If they want to give more in our country, they are FREE to do so. What this idiot that is quoted in this article cannot grasp is the difference between GIVE and TAKE.
Citizens of a FREE country GIVE to help others. This is called CHARITY. Governments TAKE (often by force) from their CITIZENS to help the government. This is called STEALING (for you liberals out there this is also referred to as taxation).
Is the UN really relevant when they cannot grasp the difference between give and take? When they advocate teh theft of property by force to reallocate wealth around the world at their discretion and political whim?
The UN is anti-American and they are dangerous.
Once again we see the contempt of the UN. The US is hated for our wealth and success. We offer more aid to more disaster hit areas of the world (and for all of you liberals out there aid=charity) and it is never enough.
For many US critics around the world, only the economic devestation of our country will make them happy. They want us to beg for assitance from them, to need them. They resent the fact that we don't.
They have the audacity to suggest that we raise taxes so that "...there would be more available if taxes were raised".
And to further show their greed, jealousy and resentment they say:
"There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy," he said, adding that politicians in the United States and Europe "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."
Taxpayers in our country are FREE to give as much over their already too high tax burden as they would like. If they want to give more in our country, they are FREE to do so. What this idiot that is quoted in this article cannot grasp is the difference between GIVE and TAKE.
Citizens of a FREE country GIVE to help others. This is called CHARITY. Governments TAKE (often by force) from their CITIZENS to help the government. This is called STEALING (for you liberals out there this is also referred to as taxation).
Is the UN really relevant when they cannot grasp the difference between give and take? When they advocate teh theft of property by force to reallocate wealth around the world at their discretion and political whim?
The UN is anti-American and they are dangerous.
2 Comments:
Damn Straight!!!!!!
I wonder what would happen if we got truly selfish, as alot of the world likes to think we are, and outright said, "We are no longer sending any kind of aid to any foreign country for any disaster they have, with the exception of our closest and most solid allies."
We won't do that, because no matter what they rest of the world thinks about us, we aren't like that. But I think if we did it for a few years they may change their tune.
And yes, the UN is very dangerous to us. We need out of that club.
Even more on this comment.
"The United States, at the president's direction, will be a leading partner in one of the most significant relief, rescue and recovery challenges that the world has ever known," said White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy.
I don't know about that. I think WW2 should have the title for that. And how come canada give 1 million and we are called stingy?
Post a Comment
<< Home