Jib 0 #26 December 29, 2004 QuoteQuoteYears ago, the wealthy felt an obligation to patronize the arts and engage in philanthropy because of their "station in life." That wasn't morality, but rather ego stroking and peer pressure. I doubt Rockefeller or Carnigie would agree with you. John D donated hundreds of millions of dollars because he wanted to and thought it was his duty, Carnigie also agreed with him. Carnegie considered philanthropy a moral imperative. Bill Gates and his wife said the following when asked about their foundation: "It was our commitment 10 years ago that whatever wealth we earn we will give back to the society." Aside from the definition of duty of which we disagree, consider that Carnegie and Rockefeller earned their money before income taxes. (I won't discuss any business practices of the times.) But, imagine having that money to spend on philanthropic causes or whatever you wanted. Gates has more money than he can ever spend and would pay billions in estate and income taxes. Wealthy people love money and hate taxes. So, like other wealthy families, Gates has set up a charitable foundation with tax benefits that he controls. He's deciding how his money is going to be spent rather than politicians. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #27 December 29, 2004 Quote[24] And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. (KJV) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This of course assumes that all who are rich are corrupt does it not? So you must feel hard work and dedication as well as a strong work ethic gives a person nothing but a corrupt mind? You then should stop training your students to learn. They may become wealthy and evil!!! no, that's not what it means. the quote about the camel and the needle is not the "punchline" of that biblical chapter. Jesus goes on to further explain it. I don't have a Bible with me right now, but the POINT of the chapter is not that rich people are evil. the point is: 1) you cannot be saved (get to heaven) under your own steam or by your own efforts. Only GOD can get you into heaven. The punchline of the chapter is the disciples ask him (after the statement about the camel) "Then who can be saved?" and then Jesus makes that point about "Thru GOD all things are possible." The problem with rich people (and by rich I'm including average income people in modern countries) is they are so damn comfortable that they have this mindset that they've got EVERYTHING under control, and this tends to cross over into their belief about the afterlife. So often the rich tend to not bother to worship God. But it is only by turning to God that you can be saved. The idea of surrendering to God & fully recognizing your dependence on God, is a common theme in Jesus' ministry. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #28 December 29, 2004 QuoteIt will not effect AQ at all. The majority of those fighting the Us don't read the papers, and those that do will not share that information, or will distort it. The Bush Admin seems to think otherwise. The White House makes a big deal and big donations to the AIDS battle in Africa to help defeat terrorism. The better the life scenario and less loved ones passing away, the harder it is for extremists to take seed in those communities. There have been a few documentaries and news stories on this topic._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #29 December 29, 2004 Yup, my bad.... I read it quickly and made assumptions. Sorry about that Kallend. I was reading 2 responses from Kallend. One in this thread and one in another, and made assumptions about what he was saying. See what happens when you assume? ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smiles 0 #30 December 29, 2004 QuoteI find it funny that the European Union has only offered 30 Million and the US has already offered 35 Million. Canada only One Million?*** ***OTTAWA Canada- Defence Minister Bill Graham defended the $4 million Canada is providing in relief efforts to Southeast Asia in the wake of the deadly tsunami, promising that more aid is coming. This is an immediate response, not a last response..........Initial help from around the world listed at this url also: http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/12/27/graham-tsunami041227.html QuoteAnd these same countries slam us every chance they get. ------We should help out, since we can. But how many countries have we thrown money at over the years only to have our gererosity ignored after the checks are cashed? Sounds to me you jumped right in to slam countries for their initial help.........Whatz with that?? You figure other countries are concerned their generosity will be ignored?? Your peticular petty attitude sucks a big one SMiles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #31 December 29, 2004 QuoteIf we can spend billions to kill people, we should be able to give billions to help grow and repair after a tragedy like this. Excellent - nice way to give the US a kick in the teeth even as we do a good thing . . . . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #32 December 30, 2004 Can anyone confirm that aid offered by Israel to Sri Lanka was turned away? I heard that this morning....but haven't had time to verify it. How awful if true... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #33 December 30, 2004 QuoteThe Bush Admin seems to think otherwise. The White House makes a big deal and big donations to the AIDS battle in Africa to help defeat terrorism. The better the life scenario and less loved ones passing away, the harder it is for extremists to take seed in those communities. There have been a few documentaries and news stories on this topic. The economic/social situation is a breeding groud for terrorists. However, I doubt handing out money after a disaster will do much. Like I said terrorists and not likely to give us credit for helping. They need to not live like shit ALL the time, not just get aid once. If a kid has an Xbox, they are less likely to go outside with a bomb. See I can disagree with Bush. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #34 December 30, 2004 QuoteSounds to me you jumped right in to slam countries for their initial help.........Whatz with that?? You figure other countries are concerned their generosity will be ignored?? Your peticular petty attitude sucks a big one I find it funny that they give less, but will slam us for not giving more than we do. I do find it funny that we give more, but get the most shit for not giving enough. That is a fucked up way to think."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lostinspace 0 #35 December 30, 2004 I often believe that I am out of sync with the whole world. I don’t understand. Articulation isn’t my forte, sorry. To all, please don’t hate me for this post. These countries do need help, I have volunteered my financial contribution. There is a post, Tsunami aid - US provides $35m, Japan $30m, UK $29m - France $136,000!?!? , dealing with stinginess. Backwards? The most expressed view on this forum believes since the US, a capitalistic country, is so well off that its constituents should be forced to financially support the humanitarian efforts currently required in the afflicted Countries and balk that a socialistic government initially pledged a trivial sum. (France has since upped their input) After 9/11, the red cross received more than 1 billion dollars. If people really care, the funds will be pledged. The resulting death toll from Sunday’s tidal wave is the result of complacent leadership. The countries directly affect did not need to develop a technique to detect tidal wave triggering events. New seismometers are available for purchase, some have even been sold on eBay. Suppose you don’t want to buy American made goods, are afraid of shoddy assembly of goods made at an outsourced assembly plant, or are afraid of identidy theft through eBay, there are instructions on line how to make a basic seismometer. Through in some research and you can make a seismometer in whatever patriotic colors you like. These countries did not need to develop a process to broadcast that danger was imminent, it’s been done before. The cost of implementing a simple system is not prohibitive, requiring only a PA system and phone lines. Wireless is even cheaper, and some of the hardware is already erected. Quote Whats that work out at? About 50 cents per an American? How much does one value human life? I don’t know, but apparently it appreciates once expired. How come no one is troubled that the US didn’t place a warning system in these countries prior to 100k people dieing? Why did the afflicted country’s governments think the cost of their citizens and tourist's lives didn’t outweigh the investment in an seismometers and PA system? 20/20 hind sight does not apply, Tsunamis have occurred before. And where is this money coming from? There is a post titled Why can't we help our own? , which the originator sites the US is quick to offer countries assistant while there is much left unrectified at home. The next poster argue the following: Quote Our government provides a foundation for opportunity that doesn't exist in most places. You can't expect to get through life with a luddite outlook; don't have skills for today...then sign up for course work! Student loans, the schools, the jobs, the toys, etc., are all out there...just add effort. BTW, did you mean help, or carry for life? Why does this applicable to an individual but not population? Most of the global problems I see appear, to me, to be a result of reprehensible leadership. BCS We are our brother’s keeper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #36 December 30, 2004 QuoteCan anyone confirm that aid offered by Israel to Sri Lanka was turned away? I heard that this morning....but haven't had time to verify it. yes. a few planes with supplies and rescue teams took off to thailand and sri lanka at first, the one sent to sri lanka was sent back because of political issues (Israel and sri lanka do not have official diplomatic relations) and because (i think) it was a military rescue team. but at least one plane with medical supplies got there and was welcomed (with a short delay) i think everything was cleared in a few hours, but it was an unnecessary delay. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #37 December 30, 2004 yep politics as usual. I really want the UN to be the "one world gov't" with a attitude like that. It's past time to deep six the UN. I see us paying about 90% world income tax because it's "only fair". When are people going to learn life is not fair. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dropoutdave 0 #38 December 30, 2004 The 30% plus of you that voted for the "It is outrageous for the U.S. to be donating billions" ought to fucking ashamed of yourselves. The effect it will have on the people of the US will be barely noticible, were talking cents per person here. Now try comparing that to the effect it will have on the millions of people trying to stay alive over there, a big fucking difference. Try to think about peoples lives rather than your wallets for just a minute. You think it's so bad you governtments using your tax dollars towards a good cause, donate a few of your wage packets then. Moan over, as you were. ------------------------------------------------------ May Contain Nut traces...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smiles 0 #39 December 30, 2004 QuoteI find it funny that the European Union has only offered 30 Million and the US has already offered 35 Million. Canada only One Million? QuoteOTTAWA (CP) - Canada has increased to $40 million the money it will donate for emergency relief in the south Asian region hit by a killer tsunami and will also consider sending a disaster relief team. Canada only 1 million?-- like I previously replied to your post, you jumped right in to slam other countries for their "initial" response, stating: QuoteAnd these same countries slam us every chance they get. SMiles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #40 December 30, 2004 QuoteCanada only 1 million?-- like I previously replied to your post, you jumped right in to slam other countries for their "initial" response, stating: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And these same countries slam us every chance they get. Are you claiming that other countries do not slam the US?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smiles 0 #41 December 30, 2004 QuoteAre you claiming that other countries do not slam the US? I am saying that comparing amounts of $$ countries are giving.... at a time when we all need to pull together to do what we can to help, is petty on your part. Canada's contribution of $40 million, and my province (British Columbia) pledge of $8 million directly to the Canadian Red Cross....is simply not enough. The enormity of the situation is so huge compared to the amount of money that we are sending----they are grateful of course, but they need and want more....we have to push for more. SMiles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #42 December 30, 2004 For the "US" to donate is nuts. However, for US citizens, as individuals, to choose to donate as they see fit is a good and fine thing to do. It's a difference between real charity and just social taxation and Big Brother. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #43 December 30, 2004 QuoteFor the "US" to donate is nuts. However, for US citizens, as individuals, to choose to donate as they see fit is a good and fine thing to do. It's a difference between real charity and just social taxation and Big Brother. Not to mention peer pressure - or is that Pier Pressure?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #44 December 31, 2004 QuoteI am saying that comparing amounts of $$ countries are giving.... at a time when we all need to pull together to do what we can to help, is petty on your part. Then you need to start getting the world to not try and compare....And you need to get the UN to stop calling countries "Stingy". So I just pointed out how stupid it was that countries will slam the US for not giving enough, but the amount we give is greater than the amount they give. I think slamming others when they give more than you is petty. I think slamming others since you think you know better than them is petty. And Canadians do that a bunch about the US."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smiles 0 #45 December 31, 2004 QuoteI think slamming others since you think you know better than them is petty. And Canadians do that a bunch about the US. As your opinion no doubt has developed from associating with many Canadians that "slam" the US, you've now have had the pleasure of chatting with one Canadian that does not slam your country. I live 5 min. from the US/Canadian border. More than half of people I associate with are US. Many travel to my d.z., and many of us travel to theirs. We get along very well, skydive together and party together- "no slamming", as you remark. Health & Happiness for the New Year! SMiles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #46 December 31, 2004 US just pledged $350 million. Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #47 January 1, 2005 Yes I do.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #48 January 1, 2005 Doubtful Sri Lanka is not a Muslim country what possible motive would they have? Sounds like Xenophobic lies to me.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #49 January 1, 2005 An early warning systenm would not have been viable in this situation as the countries involved were either to close to the epicenter to have been able to have initiated a evacuation in time or no infrastructure to relay such an alarm existed event in the event of prior knowledge. As for the Maldives or the seven thousand low lying islands that make up the Indian achipelligo where would you run to anyway? Also this is not exactly a everyday event. With hindsight we can protect against anything.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #50 January 1, 2005 Quote Not to mention peer pressure - or is that Pierre's Pressure? there, fixed..."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
