Donald Trump decides to stop aiding Tibet, reverses decade old policy

[Berengil]

Doin Solids for China.....

AMERICA FIRST!!!!

Am I doing this right?

The fact that China is pleased is, I think, irrelevant. The question that should be asked is: why should even 1 dollar of tax money go to Tibetan causes?

OTOH, if a private American citizen wants to donate to one of numerous Tibetan charities, have at it, I say.

[enragedgorilla]

So when do we stop sending "aid" to Israel?

When they stop being strategic allies in a region we are deeply invested in,financially,militarily etc.

- - - Updated - - -

You guys in America should make a sitcom about Trump. It just writes itself.

Comedy Central is pretty much all skits and jokes that are Anti Trump now.
No need for a sitcom, we have several networks dedicated to it, as well as online sources.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

Do you know how much the things you requested we spend that on cost? Do you realize that we're giving them the equivalent of pocket change for a little good will (or in the case of Israel, and bulwark and base against Muslim extremists that the right so much despises)?

Here's a hint. The infrastructure portion alone is expected to cost about a 1 trillion dollars. The 40-50 billion would do little for that.

So you're basically asking to remove some goodwill for nothing but spite. And you wonder why there are extremists that hate the us.

But again, I can't be expected to get this through to a selfish "I GOT MINE NEENEER NEENER" kitty cat.

Are you really saying that 40-50 billion isn't a good start at building infrastructure?

The USA is a big country, you can start and finish projects all over the country, it isn't "OMG WE NEED THE ENTIRE LUMP SUM OF MONEY FOR THE ENTIRE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE USA OR WE CAN"T START DOING ANYTHING!!!!"

What form of logic do you function with?

[Crissi]

Are you really saying that 40-50 billion isn't a good start at building infrastructure?

The USA is a big country, you can start and finish projects all over the country, it isn't "OMG WE NEED THE ENTIRE LUMP SUM OF MONEY FOR THE ENTIRE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE USA OR WE CAN"T START DOING ANYTHING!!!!"

What form of logic do you function with?

starting projects without adequate funding is how you get I-35 being continuously worked on and never finished for the last 25 years.

Anyways I thought foreign aid was a main way of help building up good will with countries, which decreases potential conflict (ignoring this specific example because obv China dislikes Tibet so cutting tibet aid likely helps with China). So to me, completely cutting out aid harms diplomatic efforts.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

starting projects without adequate funding is how you get I-35 being continuously worked on and never finished for the last 25 years.

Anyways I thought foreign aid was a main way of help building up good will with countries, which decreases potential conflict (ignoring this specific example because obv China dislikes Tibet so cutting tibet aid likely helps with China). So to me, completely cutting out aid harms diplomatic efforts.

So what you are saying, is the USA diplomatic efforts have helped the world?

Secondly, once again, simple logic seemingly is lost on so many.

You don't have to have funds for every single infrastructure that is needed all across the USA, before you start on ones where you have the funds for. How is this simple concept so hard for so many to understand? Is it willful stupidity?

[Crissi]

So what you are saying, is the USA diplomatic efforts have helped the world?

Secondly, once again, simple logic seemingly is lost on so many.

You don't have to have funds for every single infrastructure that is needed all across the USA, before you start on ones where you have the funds for. How is this simple concept so hard for so many to understand? Is it willful stupidity?

Like I said, they way you approach it is how you get I-35 never finished and in a continuous state of construction. (piecemeal funding resulting in things taking so long to get done that its time to revamp again) Good lord dude.

and as for the first question. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Generally people aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them though. The return is certainly going to be better than what is spent on infrastructure, which isnt going to be much in comparison

[Noxx79]

Are you really saying that 40-50 billion isn't a good start at building infrastructure?

The USA is a big country, you can start and finish projects all over the country, it isn't "OMG WE NEED THE ENTIRE LUMP SUM OF MONEY FOR THE ENTIRE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE USA OR WE CAN"T START DOING ANYTHING!!!!"

What form of logic do you function with?

No, it's not.

Groups will fight over the money. It will get split up. Projects get half done. Projects get stuck doing nothing. You have to plan out a project and fully fund it before starting. This is logic.

Or are you suggesting the the US "buy" or begin a repair when it isn't fully funded and hope the money comes in down the road? I thought conservatives were for fiscal responsibility?

[Mormolyce]

Good thing you voted in someone who's going to take a strong line on Djina.

[Masark]

Doin Solids for China.....

AMERICA FIRST!!!!

Am I doing this right?

It's a zero-indexed array.