My America

[JaVeDK]

http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/SeriesDetail.aspx?srid=650

Net ODA (Official Development Assistance) to LDCs (Least Developed Countries) as percentage of OECD/DAC donors GNI (Gross National Income) ranking 2008:

1. Luxembourg 0,38
2. Norway 0,33
3. Denmark 0,32
4. Sweden 0,32
5. Ireland 0,30
6. Netherlands 0,23
7. Belgium 0,19
8. United Kingdom 0,16
9. Finland 0,15
10. Canada 0,13
11. France 0,11
12. Switzerland 0,11
13. Germany 0,10
14. Portugal 0,10
15. Spain 0,10
16. New Zealand 0,09
17. Austria 0,07
18. Italy 0,07
19. United States 0,06
20. Greece 0,04
21. Japan 0,05
22. Korea, Republic of 0,03

[Toony]

Originally Posted by JaVeDK [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/SeriesDetail.aspx?srid=650

Net ODA (Official Development Assistance) to LDCs (Least Developed Countries) as percentage of OECD/DAC donors GNI (Gross National Income) ranking 2008:

1. Luxembourg 0,38
2. Norway 0,33
3. Denmark 0,32
4. Sweden 0,32
5. Ireland 0,30
6. Netherlands 0,23
7. Belgium 0,19
8. United Kingdom 0,16
9. Finland 0,15
10. Canada 0,13
11. France 0,11
12. Switzerland 0,11
13. Germany 0,10
14. Portugal 0,10
15. Spain 0,10
16. New Zealand 0,09
17. Austria 0,07
18. Italy 0,07
19. United States 0,06
20. Greece 0,04
21. Japan 0,05
22. Korea, Republic of 0,03

In 2009, the United States was the largest donor providing USD 28.7 billion in net ODA flows, representing an increase of 5.4% in real terms over 2008. Its ODA/GNI ratio rose from 0.19% in 2008 to 0.20% in 2009.

http://www.oecd.org/document/11/0,33..._1_1_1,00.html

[JaVeDK]

The flaw with that statistic is, that it includes aid to countries like Isreal, which is not an "underdeveloped country" thus distorting the numbers. Aid like that is not a result of the altruistic goodwill of the USA, but merely a way to preserve own interests / protect investments.

Still if you sort and rank the numbers from http://webnet.oecd.org/oda2009/ by ODA/GNI the USA is still at the bottom with quite a difference in % to the top countries and far from the UN ODA target of 0.7% of GNI.

[Akame]

My country donates more than your country.

Nu uh! Well my country is more GREEN Than yours!

Get real! Mine has freedom of choice!

Well mine has real healthcare!

My country could totally beat up your country. Srsly, we have nukes.

.....

...

Bitch!

[Toony]

Originally Posted by JaVeDK [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The flaw with that statistic is, that it includes military aid and aid to countries like Isreal, which is not an "underdeveloped country" thus distorting the numbers. Aid like that is not a result of the altruistic goodwill of the USA, but merely a way to preserve own interests / protect investments.

"Underdeveloped countries" like Haiti? http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/related/62/

The United States leads all countries with its commitments of $713 million — with Canada, France, Spain, the United Kingdom, Japan and the European Union among other top donors.

Several of the counties on the underdeveloped list contain less than a million people, go ahead and run those countries through the same filter if you like.. it hardly paints an accurate picture.

And I'm sure the lives saved by the United States military aid would hardly describe that aid as a flaw.

[Toony]

Originally Posted by Akame [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My country donates more than your country.

Nu uh! Well my country is more GREEN Than yours!

Get real! Mine has freedom of choice!

Well mine has real healthcare!

My country could totally beat up your country. Srsly, we have nukes.

.....

...

Bitch!

I agree actually, it's a ridiculous argument, it was in response to an equally ridiculous premise.

[JaVeDK]

Originally Posted by Toony [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"Underdeveloped countries" like Haiti? http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/related/62/

And I'm sure the lives saved by the United States military aid would hardly describe that aid as a flaw.

Or the lives lost due to this military "aid" (or meddling to serve own interests if you will) - the afghan war in the 80's anyone? Let's call that a tie, and that's being generous.

[Toony]

Originally Posted by JaVeDK [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Or the lives lost due to this military "aid" (or meddling to serve own interests if you will) - the afghan war in the 80's anyone? Let's call that a tie, and that's being generous.

Oh, you want to have a different discussion now?

[Akame]

Originally Posted by Toony [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I agree actually, it's a ridiculous argument, it was in response to an equally ridiculous premise.

The bottom line Toony is there is nothing wrong with the OP's pride in his country, or his desire to want to see it become a better place than it is now. And to each his own in his decision on how to go about doing that.

Encourage one another in the things we choose to stand for and fight for, don't belittle them just because their battle is not one you would pick.

[JaVeDK]

Originally Posted by Akame [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My country donates more than your country.

Nu uh! Well my country is more GREEN Than yours!

Get real! Mine has freedom of choice!

Well mine has real healthcare!

My country could totally beat up your country. Srsly, we have nukes.

.....

...

Bitch!

I agree also, but then again this seems to be the underlying point with this whole thread. If you use statistics to serve your own point, expect to be called out on it if they are wrong or misleading.