<p>From * The American Thinker *:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks for posting this. Have to check it out.</p>
<p>This is one of the reasons why I am not supporting Obama, to combat poverty we have to remove the subsidies that we give to the rich farmers. The subsidies make them overproduce, and this overproduction decreases the world price for the produce, thereby putting poor farmers in third world countries in poverty since they have to sell their produce at a much cheaper price.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why Obama can support the Farm Bill and talk about reducing poverty. It just does not make sense. The Farm Bill is going to put more people in poverty. </p>
<p>The sad part is, the government also buys some of these produce at artificial high prices (that benefits rich farmers) and dump them in third world countries as “aid”.</p>
<p>This is change I can’t believe in.</p>
<p>bz - you are mischaracterizing the bill. It is the Global Poverty Bill and it requires no minimum funding. It merely gives a commitment to alleviate global poverty. The Millenium Declaration referenced in the bill makes no mention of the percentage of GDP either. This is a completely made up scare tactic. The current administration has already committed to the goals of the MIllenium Declaration.</p>
<p>cartera -take it up w/ Lee Cary at * The American Thinker. *</p>
<p>But what’s mischaracterizing about the fact that:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…and calls upon the U.N. to distribute the funds?</p>
<p>I guess we shouldn’t pay it any mind since it’s only a little under a $Trillion.</p>
<p>What’s mischaracterizing about it is that the bill doesn’t say that - very simple. Read the bill - not what some right wing webzine says it says.</p>
<p>It’s an idiotic bill regardless. We shouldn’t be committing anything. When worse comes to worse (and it’s coming in the next 2-3 years). We are gonna have our hands full with our own poor, we don’t need to worry about the perpetually poor in other countries.</p>
<p>It’s about time someone else steps up to the plate. We’ve been bailing countries out for a long time and forgeting about the debt we’re owed. Meanwhile, other countries won’t do the same for us.</p>
<p>Yes, the U.S. provides about 22% of the U.N.'s budget - more than any other country (and the max allowed I think). Japan is next at 16%.</p>
<p>Data from 2006 shows that the US contributed $423,464,855.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bailouts come in different forms. I can think of two recent examples: </p>
<p>Earlier this year, investment funds of foreign governments (also known as sovereign wealth funds) rescued some of America’s biggest banks and investment firms–including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Bear Stearns, and Merrill Lynch–to the tune of billions of dollars. Foreign governments involved in the bailouts include Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, Singapore, Korea, Japan, and China.</p>
<p>Central banks of foreign governments such as China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia have also bailed out the US in the recent past. To finance the Iraq War, the US issued billions of dollars worth of bonds. When US private demand for the bonds proved weak, foreign central banks stepped in and purchased the bonds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And we pretty well are the International Red Cross and NATO</p>