Obama's US senatorial claim to fame: $845b of global aid funneled through the UN
Posted by seed @ 1:12 PM
No shit. Here it is: Obama wants to end world poverty on your nickel and surrender the United States to the United Nation
The Global Poverty Act (S.2433) would require the United States to spend $845 billion ($845,000,000,000.00) on welfare to third-world countries. This amounts to a tax of over $2,000 on each man, woman and child in the United States. The foreign aid budget now stands at $300 billion; the Act would add the additional expenditure to the already huge amount allocated to assist the world.
What? Nobody is talking about this? Hmmm, seems to me that tripling the budget for foreign aid is not such a fucking great idea, when you know, currently 25ยข of every dollar the Fed spends goes towards interest on previous spending we could not afford.
But hey, when you are thinking about that extra two grand, or ten for a family of five, that you don't have, remember: it feels good to give...
And receive: bend over.
Comments
Isn't it wonderful that can have a Messiah to save us from all our problems in life. STOP NOW!!!! This jerk is an empty suit. Now he is on a march to save world. Oh, for sure its on our money. This guy is a phoney When does the real world finally take of the blinds and see the real world, the "MESSIAH HAS NO CLOTHES"
Posted by: Capt. Jerry | July 22, 2008 12:40 PM
Bouya. The Mint strongly encourages open participation.
As for OB1 being an empty suit, I am not sure that applies. I see him as a rather skilled attorney that has grown up in the Blue Machine of the Illinois Legislative Branch.
However, a strong oration style does not assume strength in policy. This is an example of OB1's lack of judgement. The issue with S.2433 is the exclusion of factors that encourage development in addition to the funds. We can get into the details of the bill if needed, the gist is typical Obama-style piling-on. He has a (short) history of getting behind political slam-dunks.
In this case, Global Poverty seems to be an easy win. The issue with this bill is that it could potentially tie the US to the arbitrary 0.7 GDP annual contribution, which can total nearly $100B annually, to a UN-based fund. The UN does not consider political development as a goal of global relief. Essentially, our cash could be donated without its fullest leverage. So, when the US asks for fair trade, legit elections, non-proliferation, 'fer shit's sake... clean buses, it cannot hold its aid as ransom. Folks, that's an ass-handling without the reach-around.
It's like being obligated to contribute to every bad lifestyle without the leverage to change the behavior.
But, you know, I bet OB1 didn't read the entire text. Or didn't think you did.
Posted by: seed | July 23, 2008 12:45 AM