I think the u.s. get involved in everything,because our people come fromm everywhere;were just plain nosy too.lolz.i think we should give the hatians money because they need it and maybeh one day in like 5thousand years well get repaid.

You disgust me. Where would the US be now without the world around? It would be a dump, with Native Americans still running around, wacking each other with obsidian weapons to the great amusement of the civilized world.

I mean, come on. Ethics is what being human is all about. Not money or resources. If humans don't help each other, we're just lonely wolves without support, and then where's the strength in mankind? Obama is a clever guy if he wants to help. Read what I'm about to tel closely.

Iceland, a country that was utterly crushed financially by your banks, is bankrupt. They didn't receive any help to recover. And what country but Iceland is the first to send help to haiti? That is how the moral of everyone should be. Because of USA, Iceland has been set back several steps, and unselfishly they run to another country's aid.

Iceland is an inspiration to the world after this action. And if the world's largest economy can't help, then who can? Helping those in need is vital for further life, in any nations. And no matter if the United State help or not, they will get help if a disaster strikes them.

And seriously, how can ALL of you even care about money when up to 100 000 people are assumed dead and several hundred thousand are threatened? You are on the internet, you live in a country with more than enough money. I suggest you leave that capitalist point of view and get empathy and solidarity.

Thank you, Iceland. I hope the rest of the world follows your example!

No matter how much financial aid we give, 40,000+ Haitians are still dead. Why waste precious money, time, and resources to help them recover back to a state of debt and squalor? Nobody wins that way.

Profit is not important. Making other people actually survive is. Imagine if there was 40,000 people lying dead in your state. Would you cry for help or would you say "We'll manage" and forgive people because they are too selfish to help you? I think not. I think you'd cry more than anyone has ever done before, because you don't know what trouble is. You're born with a silver spoon in your mouth and in your ass, and apparently one in your brain that prevents you from thinking straight. You have probably never done a day's work in your life, and you only care about the profit of your wealthy suburb parents. You have no experience to judge this from, and nor do I. But I can imagine things and the consequences. Please, don't express your fascistic views anymore.

And then the real post:

Of course, money is a part of today's society. But money is not worth anything without people using it. Money is a theoretical system, where small pieces of paper can be traded for, say, a decent meal. Haiti exports textiles, coffee and electric equipments, probably three of the things US citizens use the most, and most often. It is a varied piece of nature, with both beaches and mountains. Natural beauty is a part of the country. If there's no people there, there's no way tourists can get there. And tourism is important to recreate yourself. So what do you do when there are no people on that lovely island in the Caribbean to serve you? Haiti is an important country, as all other countries. Helping them will also give results.

You really do make me feel sick. You're giving aid to try and stop the problems getting any worse. God knows how many people have been pulled from the wreckage created by the earthquake but they wouldn't have made it out if countries such as the USA had not given aid. These people are most probably struggling to find food, there's another reason why you're giving aid. You're trying to prevent the massive death toll from getting worse. I can see where you are coming from with most of your arguments, but that was just pure dumb.

Lets not have this turn into another "Xtreme is a cold, heartless bastard and I don't want to contribute to the discussion" thread, eh?

Look at it from a purely financial perspective and respond.

I agree with the rest of your post but stfu


Okay, a country that's already trillions of dollars in debt spends a bit more and is seen by other nations (who we trade with) as a moral country rather than a heartless anti-humanitarian one. It's not a very tangible benefit, but most of the civilized world does possess some morality, and when dealing with them it helps to adopt it to some extent as well as long as it is of no disproportionate cost to the welfare of the country.

Everyone seems to have adopted this "it's only a little bit more" attitude.

How do you think we got 11 trillion deep in the shitter in the first place?

It wasn't all at once, but bit by bit.

And we're going to need more spending to get out of this eventually, but that goes beyond this. This is something that we're expected to at least aid as much as other countries are.

Yes, well, actually the biggest chunks of those debts are from the war in Iraq and recent government action to try and bail out our economy. So depending on how you look at it, it was all at once. Or at least within the past 10-20 years depending on how you view the situation. And 10-20 years isnt really all that long fiscally.

Also, I get that you are trying to be practical, but don't get upset when people call you a heartless prick, because that is how you are acting.

Further more, you aren't taking into account the giant shit storm of local protest and outrage that would occur if the US did nothing. US citizens would NOT be happy if our government sat by and watched all this and only responded by saying "sorry, cba". And I can promise you that any politician or anchor man who criticizes our government for sending aid is speaking on purely political terms to try and make the Obama administration look bad. There is no other reason for any official or journalist to bash them for doing something any person would do in this situation. honestly I haven't been watching the new, so I don't know if that is happening, but your ideas sound a lot like FoxNews backwash, so Im guessing.

You aren't thinking practically at all actually, you are thinking selfishly and narrowly. And that is not meant as an insult, I can see the benefits to what you are saying, but they are skimpy as fuck compared to the negatives of your ideas.