by Ann:
Chinadoll: I'm well aware of that. But I don't think the actual amount really shows anything. See, to a poor country one dollar might mean the same as hundred dollars in the USA. That is why I feel the stats I used are more meaningful then just looking at it shallowly. Know what I mean?
Maybe I'm just half asleep this Monday morning, but I'm still not following. If one of our US dollars might mean the same as 100 dollars to a poor country then doesn't the fact that the US donated more $$ than any other country even if it is just an extremly small percentage of our GNP mean something? Or are you trying to say that if the US would have donated at least the UN's goal of .7% of a country's GNP that more of a difference to poorer countries could have been made?

Your original quote: "The USA often tries masquerading as a helpful country; always ready to aid poor and needy countries with it's wealth. However, the USA's aid (in terms of percentage to their GDP) is the lowest of any industrialized nation in the world! " While yes, our aid is the lowest in relation to our GNP...how can we be, as you say, "masquerading as a helpful country" when in terms of raw dollars the US gave the most?

Maybe this is one of those times to agree to disagree. I guess I'm just not getting where you're coming from.