Yes, The U.S. does Care

And you care very much about this topic :

Just so people don't go to the effort of repeating themselves:
http://www.thecatsite.com/forums/sho...ght=charitable

Well, yes..if a USA Today article expired on the topic, surely there would be nowhere else to locate the information.

I dunno. Here's your big pat on the back?

Yay. Go America and your tax shelters for charitable donations, especially for the mega rich..whoohoo.

Screw everyone else with less incentive on charitable donations because they give it in way of their taxes to feed and clothe and shelter the poor on a REGULAR basis.
Translation: Many other countries give MORE in way of aid to social programs each paycheque.

Oddly enough, they don't brag about it.

Oddly enough, things like that don't make articles in USA Today.

Just re-read my view on your last post on this topic (only just over a month ago). I don't have the energy to repeat myself.

We do donate a lot of money to things-- but only what we deem 'worthy' causes when it suits our interest.

It would be a whole lot more helpful to give real support to impoverished families than to buy them Christmas presents once a year (not that that isn't a good cause), but Bush is too busy cutting health care for poor children.

What about charity to your own people?

Why is it that in some Southern States, black people (gee I hate that term) are still treated like second class citizens? And why is your OWN healthcare system so poor?

Its easy for a government to make a country look good when it suits them, while stabbing their own people in the back at the same time

I also want to add that I love America and Americans. I don't want it to seem like I am bashing.

It's one of the best diverse countries with the ultimate diverse landscape and varities of free-thinking people. And your liquor laws are not archaic either

It's just a pet peeve of mine when people are smug and self-congratulatory, especially at the expense of another.

Wait wait, Cindy said that "Americans" are unselfish... not "America". Now she may have meant America and not specifically Americans, but the article specifically says that the money comes from private sources, and that the government portion of all that is only actually about 18% of the total amount of American money..which means a lot of charitable donations from citizens and from charities often funded by donations.

Some of that, I'm sure, comes from companies or from the rich, but, you know, someone rich can pick whatever charity they choose, it doesn't have to be one that supports another country. the tax break is a tax break no matter what charity they donate to. They could just as easily donate to something like planned parenthood or on the other side of the fence, an organization that is pro-life.

There's no difference between America and Americans. People refuse to pay higher taxes and will elect the government based on that; besides, there is absolutely no way to separate a government like ours from its people. Not all of us agree with everything they do, obviously, but one unwavering truth in American politics is that people mostly don't care one way or the other until their taxes go up.

of course we refuse to pay higher taxes, Maybe some of you may enjoy THINKING your money is going for good things. watching your pay check get smaller and smaller
I much perfer keeping my money and using it where i choose.

if i had my way not one dime of american money would be sent over sea for a Good cause, it would stay here to support the those that needed help.

I think there is a marked difference between America (usually defined by the current government) and Americans. In this particular time I'm not sure how they could be considered the same, given the mass amount of dissent in the country between the government and the citizens.

Definitely taxes influence the way that people vote, and I agree there's no way to physically separate the people from the government, but I don't think that you can say that the people are the same as the government. It is true, though that a lot of people don't care until it affects their taxes.. but then that's probably why most of the donations come from private sources and not the government. People aren't willing to pay higher taxes. Government isn't willing to cut the budget where we have too much spending to offset the areas in which we don't have enough, so ... basically people who do care contribute privately.

I think there's some confusion in America about distinguishing between the government and the people. After all, our government is supposedly a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." C'mon. How long did it take for that to go by the boards? Did that already start going down the toilet when President George Washington put down the Whiskey Rebellion by force of arms? After all, what we they protesting? "Taxation without representation?" Sounds familiar, eh? And it's been downhill ever since. No, I think people in the rest of the world have a clearer picture. They know to distinguish between the government of the U.S. and the people. Individual Americans are still fairly well-liked in most of the world, but they hate the U.S. government.

I think there is a difference between the government of a nation and its people. I think that there are many good, fine, generous, philanthropic, kind and giving Americans. As there are in any nation. Just because your government is a total joke, doesn't mean that your people are.

What is a country if it isn't the people it is composed of? I said already that we need not agree with everything our govt does, but our government is composed of almost entirely Americans, voted into position by Americans.

If this isn't true, our democracy has failed miserably. If the government does something, America, and therefore Americans, are doing it. Refusing that is refusing responsibility for ourselves. We can't say "Oh, that was our government, not us".

I am in no way "confused" about this.

As for other people outside of the US knowing the difference, most of us sure don't give them that courtesy. People boycott Target because it is owned by French people, whose government refused to be a wide-eyed puppydog for Bush. Just the first example that springs to mind.

That's all true, but I also feel that there are a great many people in your country and in mine who did NOT vote for our current governments, and therefore cannot be tarred with the same brush. I do not want to be identified with Mr Howard any more than you would want to be identified with Mr Bush. I stand against my government in nearly all things, and that makes me separate.

Target owned by French people!?!? Is that the latest bit of silliness going around the internet? Well, I'll beat Snopes to the rescue. Target is a public corporation owned by the shareholders. The largest individual shareholders (owning 5% or more apiece) are Capital Research, State Street Global, and American Funds. All U.S. investment companies. Among the individuals holding significant numbers of shares are some very unFrench names such as Ulrich, Kovacevich, Griffith, Steinhafel, Johnson, and Scully. In fact, there are no French names at all on the insider trading list. I don't know where this stuff comes from, but I wish people would check before they make unsupported accusations.

PS - all this information is public record. Just go to any stock information website. I used MSN Money.

ETA - well, Snopes is up-to-date on this: http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/target.asp

I didn't figure it was particularly true-- but that's what people believe and the example stands as is. Perhaps even better. A slightly true example would be people not using CitiBank because a little of it is owned by a Saudi prince.

lol coming from there, i would not make comments about goverments being a joke.

but then again, what goverment is not.

lol what a bunch of sore losers gee, iw oudl have expected a better statment not the normal US version of that. sorry i did not vote for the goverment in office, so they are not my goverment, i guess you could have packed up and move to indo or thailand. oh wait those are not really half free places, and you could be put in jail for speaking your views.

i would guess that since that is who got elected then most of you country men would disagree with your views. If you think you could do a better job then run for office.
to bad taking over the world is to much like work lol

And I don't need to remind you - as I have done over and over - that I am just as vehemently outspoken about my own country's shortcomings and evils as I am yours. And absolutely I have every right to not identify with a government I did not vote in. That is not being a sore loser, that's just being of a different political persuasion.

And yes, voting is compulsory here, and Mr Howard kept winning over and over because he kept helping keep the rich, rich, and helped make the middle class even richer, too. I have never been as financially well off as I am under this government. A lot of people are and have been swayed by that.

However, not anymore. Money isn't everything. The divide between rich and poor is a gulf as wide as it is in your country. And opinion polls leading up to our next federal election (this year) show that Mr Howard is in very big trouble. People are sick of his lies and the fact that he has his head so far up your President's butt that he can't stand alone anymore. So, actually, most of the country - these days - absolutely agrees with my views.

if you really think yoru goverment is evil then take over,or move back to europe and give the land back to the native people.

but i guess if Howard kepts winning. then you are not in the majority then.
just like i wont be if clinton gets elected. hmm think i will move to thailand if that happens :P

hmmm

Take over?? Yeah, right. I do plan to move into politics and already have steps under my belt. I'm not going to run away from my country just because it's run by a fascist selfish worm. I am doing things to change this place - small things, individual things, but you gotta start somewhere.

And read what I said - he kept winning. He won't win this year. The majority is shifting. I have nightmares that people will still put the dollar before what is right - the only problem is, our economy is booming so much now that nobody can afford anything unless they are super wealthy. He's made some BIG mistakes lately that people just don't want to ignore anymore. And about time, too.

Oh, and by the way, I am all for giving a great deal of land back to the native people. And I'm not alone in that, either, although I will concede I am in a small minority on that one.

Don't worry about it... apparently you're not allowed to speak against the USA regardless of whether you live here or not without being subject to disdainful commentary from flag waving patriots... oh, and if you do live here and don't like what's going on here, and choose to use your freedom of speech and right to dissent... then you're just told snidely to shut up, that you're opinions aren't welcome.. move to Thailand...get out of this country if you don't like it....and are subjected to a litany of mostly unrelated snitty commentary that's simply meant to bash other people.... what a bunch of progandistic bs.


If all the people who disagreed with the US currently left, a lot of that private funding that is being generously given to the other countries would be lost. I've found that *generally*, not always mind you, the people that jump on the "stand for everything the US government does or you don't deserve to be American" bandwagon are generally the ones that scream about how much tax they're paying to social services but don't seem to mind how much goes to fund the military and war. Again, that's not everybody. And Cindy, I haven't ever actually see you say any of that, so I specifically do not mean you here.

Zissou -- voted in is somewhat debatable imo. The democracy is failing miserably. Unfortunately, in this day and age, you *can* say that that was our government, not us, because as it's been so obvious all throughout, nothing short of rioting and throwing a coup is going to get this administration out of office. They don't abide by laws, and they're not running a democracy, they're running a dictatorship. Normally I would be in total agreement with you on this, in fact... I would be if it were *any* other government to date, republican or democrat.

As for Target, while it's an urban legend as to who they're owned by..it would have given me all the more reason to shop there instead of Wal-Mart. But then, I sent a box of pretzels to the white house.