You know? People here want to help with man power, etc. Not the least because it is a tourist area and some people od have family members that were on vacation there. However, with an attitude like that why should they help?

That's why I stayed out of this thread up to now ... I'm afraid that the AlienQ disease might be contagious.... :1orglaugh

this post will be ignored because it isn't as fun to be wrong

I'm certain that Canada will house your refugees like they did during Sept. 11

They will lend you sump pumps, just like they gave you fire support planes during the california wild fires.

And regardless how much is done for you. American conservatives will still delight in telling us how worthless Canada is without America.

Russia Ready to Send Rescuers to Katrina Disaster Area

Two Russian Ilyshin cargo planes with rescue workers, search helicopters and special equipment for off-line operations in disaster areas are on standby at the Ramenskoe aerodrome outside Moscow ready to leave for the United States.

You are kidding, right? This is just some clever plan to get sigviews or someshit.. because you can't really be this dumb. I mean, honestly... you claim everyone else is stupid in this thread, yet..your posts show the least understanding.

I wonder if the people jumping on this 'per capita' stuff would prefer making 3 $35 sales per day or 28 $15 sales per day. I mean, per capita the 3 $35 sales are far more generous so that must be what matters then by this logic.

The question is, would you really feel like people cared if they all threw you dimes, or if they threw you dollars?

Well what is the purpose of the endeavor, to try to prove to someone else that you care, or to actually help them by some tangible means? I'd say whichever method ends up with the most $ amount is going to be of the greatest assistance. More people can usually do less work each and still end up accomplishing more as a group. So what?

Do you think anyone actually receiving the aid gives a shit about the gross domestic product of the donors, per capita statistics or any of that shit? :1orglaugh

I sometimes wonder how many people it takes, telling someone they are wrong before they finally realize it.

One of the things the rest of the world does not like about America is the arrogance of its people, even when presented with facts to prove they are wrong they will still not admit they are wrong, instead they prefere to call other people stupid :)

:1orglaugh Right on.

Have you ever seen an example of a starving person in a third world country that is upset because, on a per capita basis, Americans gave less money than some other other country? Or do you think that at that point in time they care more about the 20 bags of food from the US and appreciate equally the one that came from Luxembourg (which is much more 'generous' per capita) as well?

If any of you sincerely believe those in need of the aid care more about the former than the latter, then your genuine interest is not in helping others but in your own self image.

You dumb fucking cock nuggets. America gives more PERIOD as a fucking whole to all your shit fuck useless ass nations. Argue all you want but you are just fucking wannabes and without OUR people none of you fuckers would even have internet service OR customers. Fuck twats get off USA nuts.

Hahaha... wow, the egotism is astounding. Without you, the world wouldn't exist!! :1orglaugh

Who do you think your fucking customers are to your shitty fucking program? Recognize motherfucker.

Oh man...... oh man..... must not write anything, must not....... ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Actually Japan alone gives over 1 billion dollars more per year then the mighty USA, and they have LESS than half your population. You generous fuckers you! :1orglaugh

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don

Source: CIA World Factbook, March 2005

Those numbers are fucking bullshit because they come from different YEARS
1. Japan $7.9 billion (FY03/04)
2. United States $6.9 billion (1997)
3. Germany $5.6 billion (1998)
4. France $5.4 billion (2002)
5. United Kingdom $4.2 billion (2004)
6. Netherlands $4 billion (2003 est.)
Give me a fucking break you motherfuckers know damn well without the United States many of you fuckers wouldnt even speak your native languages. Get the fuck off USA nuts. Get customers in your own shitty ass country.

fuck it ill admit it us americans aren't generous. we still provided the most aid. oh and that cute little brunette you saw at the coffee shop the other day you can thank us for that.

AHha Wonderful, I see now the searing hatred for America.

Poor little Monkey's...

Tis true, without the USA's Surfers and credit cards most of these ass fucks would be out of business. It Is American's that these foriegn low lifes target to buy there porn while conducting scams on Americans.

To boot Americans buy more porn per capita than any other nation in the world!

With A population of 260 Million people America is still not giving enough to the world because America is 260 Million compared to there dinky 5 Million or so that gives more per capita!

Per Capita is United Nations Bullshit to guilt trip Americans to sucker more money out of us.

Shut the fuck up haters.

We will rebuild New Orleans ourselves and save your sorry asses at the same time. When the reality is, America should just go back to itself and let the world blow itself up. Unfortunatly it is one god damn planet and what affects you affects us...

One Hundy!!

muhahhahahaaaaa

Big B
CECash.com

God damnit anyone who can't understand Per Capita statistic should shut the fuck up...

Yes the starving africain don't care about per capita....but I see no starving children here...you can't really be that fucking clueless...How do you expect a small country like Denmark to give more than the US damn...I can't believe i'm trying to explain that...

YOU'RE NOT THE MOST GENEROUS COUNTRY, YOU'RE JUST THE MOST POPULATED... how stupid do you have to be to not grasp this simple concept...

Again: following your logic...

Person for person... USA is the most unemployed country!....it has more unemployed person than Canada, Japan, Germany, France, UK etc...

Wait...no .... that's false... Because it only has more unemployed person because it has a BIGGER POPULATION...so you have to come up with a % (the unemployment rate) that will take that into consideration (i.e. 10% of the POPULATION is unemployed)...
you can't take raw numbers....you're talking about a country with like 20x the population of denmark...and you wonder why the USA give more...god damn I hope you're kidding...

Fact is...Danish are more generous...eh...
__________________

But the results of the raw numbers are the PRIMARY concern of those in need though, aren't they?

So the per capita stuff doesn't really matter to anyone except someone trying to get some kind of recognition for their own efforts. Go buy yourself a "You're a winner" bumper sticker and be done with it already if that's what you're looking for. No one else cares.

SilverTab; Alien is a lost cause. Don't waste your time.

And ultimately, whichever country the money came from at all is irrelevant to those in need. So it doesn't even matter that the US gave $X and Canada gave $Y. In the end, the guy in need gets $X+$Y. So couldn't it quite easily be argued that people shouting about how much the US gives in total are looking for a national pat on the back themselves?

Well I never said those who received the contributions shouldn't keep in mind who helped them. Far from it.

But assuming it was some genuine contribution and not just a token amount to 'get their name on the list', what point is served by arguing about these numbers? Idiots can cut up statistics any way they want, saying one country is more generous if you take into account the population, or if you take into account the GDP, or if you divide it by the average income, or if you factor in that one country was in a recession at the time while consumer spending was up in another, etc... these types of formulas can be viewed from so many sides that they are essentially meaningless. If you think they do prove something just read the past 100 or so posts again LOL.

Bump for more laughs! :1orglaugh

For those that think per capita statistics are somehow worthless and the overall numbers are what's important, let's take a look at another statistic that SilverTab mentioned. Unemployment.

The US population is 295 million. Zimbabwe's population is approximately 12 million.

The unemployment rate in the US is about 5 percent now, right? That means there are 14.75 million unemployed americans. That is more than Zimbabwe's entire population. Zimbabwe's unemployment is 70 percent with a staggering 8.4 million people out of work. Now, using the logic of those saying that per capita statistics are meaningless, and that the overall numbers are all that is important, then surely you guys would be saying that in this comparison, the US has worse unemployment than Zimbabwe?

Or would you prefer to use per capita statistics when it looks positive and suits you?

I will never donate one fucking dime to any foreign disaster relief again, unless its a country that is really poor. Fuck the rest of the world!

That's a totally different situation which would require a totally different method of viewing and analyzing the statistics.

Obviously you're too ignorant to grasp the reason why that is. Or you're a troll attempting to bait conversation. Do you honestly think that all situations should only be measured through one method of analysis?

ok basically...when it makes USA looks good, use Per Capita statistics, when it makes USA looks bad, don't use them....

riiiight!...

you said it yourself: Do you really think all situations should only be measured through one method of analysis? so why are you doing it with aid statistics?

And to answer what others said before: Do you think a starving african care about per capita blabla.... do YOU honestly think that a starving african care that USA give more than small countries like Denmark? All he cares about is eating...so that's REALLY not an arguement...

fact is...the average Danish gives him much more food....Japan even gave more than you and they have a smaller population...

I'M NOT saying USA isnt giving enough...any foreign aid is appreciated i'm 100% sure of that...but stop pretending you guys are the most generous! it's just not true...per capita statistics ALWAYS serves a purpose...it put things in perspective...which you don't seem to be able to do...

Chodadog: I really think we should stop trying..

fact is...not a SINGLE non-american person agreed that per capita statistics means shit.... while even 4 or 5 americans (because there are also a lot of smart people in the US..) admitted that saying per capita dont mean shit is just being plein stupid

I find it simply astonishing that some Americans do not grasp the very simple concept of per capita statistics and when to use it (i.e. when you are comparing countries with vastly different populations)

Do they not teach this very basic concept at school...or are some Americans just not prepared to admit that they are not the most generous nation on Earth?

it's a bit ironic with all the looting that happened in iraq that usa are doing the same

over 800 people died today in baghdad. this is a bigger disaster in human loss. Get over yourself.

YOU SIR ARE STILL AN IDIOT

oh and by the way. The proper expression is case IN point.

I see what you're saying... It's just like when one man with a net worth of $20,000 gives $100/year to charity he's not as generous as a man that has a net worth of $1,000,000 and gives $105/year.

Is that what you're saying? Did I get it?

Well since you're at least responding to this somewhat politely I'll explain it to you. The per capita analysis doesn't mean anything in this instance because the end result of assisting those in need isn't affected by it. They only care about the total received regardless of where it came from and who gave how much. What is being measured by a total sum is the requirements of the person IN NEED and whether it has been met, you can measure the groups who are GIVING by any standards you want and come up with a million different numbers depending on how you divide it.

In your example of unemployment rates, the per capita is significant because it's in direct relation to the desired outcome of the people IN NEED, for the same reasons you mentioned. In the other example what is being measured is just the opposite, the givers, not the recipients.

An absolute measure, or a total sum measure, is irrelevant in this instance. To compare this with what was being compared above you would need to analyze what someone was doing to create jobs on a per capita basis.

Hmm, that sounds like a nationalist comment there, like you're trying to place your people above our people... that's something you don't often see people in the US doing even when they have the opportunity to do so - there's a reason for that.

Does not alter the fact that the US is the number one donator of monies...now does it?