I hope we don't pay another penny.




Sent from my ZTE A2017U using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-09-2019 01:54 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I hope we don't pay another penny.




Sent from my ZTE A2017U using CSNbbs mobile app

I think we should evict them as well.

Should have been evicted long ago. They do not represent our best interests, ever.

GOOD!

So I'm assuming this great organization won't be able to get involved with what's going on in Syria with Turkey?

Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

Why does the US have to pay 22% of the bill (almost $5.4 Billion) when we don't need the UN and they hate us?

I mean think of all the social programs your ilk could implement with $5.4 Billion.. And what has the UN does for the US lately besides take up parking in NY and make the city more miserable when they meet?

(10-09-2019 02:57 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

Why does the US have to pay 22% of the bill (almost $5.4 Billion) when we don't need the UN and they hate us?

I mean think of all the social programs your ilk could implement with $5.4 Billion.. And what has the UN does for the US lately besides take up parking in NY and make the city more miserable when they meet?

The US pays more than the next three highest paying nations (UK, Japan, Germany) combined. Others need to pay more and that's not asking too much.

(10-09-2019 02:57 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

Why does the US have to pay 22% of the bill (almost $5.4 Billion) when we don't need the UN and they hate us?

I mean think of all the social programs your ilk could implement with $5.4 Billion.. And what has the UN does for the US lately besides take up parking in NY and make the city more miserable when they meet?

That's a matter for Congress to decide, not President Trump (and they have worked on legislation in the past such as the Helms-Biden Bill in 1999 to reduce the load from 25 (or maybe 28 percent) to 22 percent.

Bring your case to the Senate and get a bill passed there on reducing the U.S. input. And then see what the House does after that. Isn't that how legislation is supposed to work?

After the 2016 election, 55 percent of Republicans, 78 percent of Independents and 84 percent of Democrats supported the U.S. paying our dues to the U.N. on time and in full.

https://betterworldcampaign.org/us-un-pa...s-un-poll/

(10-09-2019 03:11 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:57 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

Why does the US have to pay 22% of the bill (almost $5.4 Billion) when we don't need the UN and they hate us?

I mean think of all the social programs your ilk could implement with $5.4 Billion.. And what has the UN does for the US lately besides take up parking in NY and make the city more miserable when they meet?

That's a matter for Congress to decide, not President Trump (and they have worked on legislation in the past such as the Helms-Biden Bill in 1999 to reduce the load from 25 (or maybe 28 percent) to 22 percent.

Bring your case to the Senate and get a bill passed there on reducing the U.S. input. And then see what the House does after that. Isn't that how legislation is supposed to work?

After the 2016 election, 55 percent of Republicans, 78 percent of Independents and 84 percent of Democrats supported the U.S. paying our dues to the U.N. on time and in full.

https://betterworldcampaign.org/us-un-pa...s-un-poll/

So you have no issue paying billions to an organization that would rather spit on us than help us?

While you're pondering your response FBO.. Think on this as well.. The UN doesn't have enough funds to possibly make it through October as it stands, and have cut out all travel unless it's deemed essential, so what all are they doing that's non-essential? And how do you piss through that kind of money?

(10-09-2019 03:11 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:57 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

Why does the US have to pay 22% of the bill (almost $5.4 Billion) when we don't need the UN and they hate us?

I mean think of all the social programs your ilk could implement with $5.4 Billion.. And what has the UN does for the US lately besides take up parking in NY and make the city more miserable when they meet?

That's a matter for Congress to decide, not President Trump (and they have worked on legislation in the past such as the Helms-Biden Bill in 1999 to reduce the load from 25 (or maybe 28 percent) to 22 percent.

Bring your case to the Senate and get a bill passed there on reducing the U.S. input. And then see what the House does after that. Isn't that how legislation is supposed to work?

After the 2016 election, 55 percent of Republicans, 78 percent of Independents and 84 percent of Democrats supported the U.S. paying our dues to the U.N. on time and in full.

https://betterworldcampaign.org/us-un-pa...s-un-poll/

This isn't some Trump thing. In the '90s the US nearly lost its General Assembly vote as it withheld mandatory contributions. I don't like the UN; however, as long as it exists and we are a part we play by the rules. Those rules/dues should be recalibrated though with other nations picking up way more of the bill. We've been footing the majority of the bill for way to long. People apparently thought the same in the 1990s.

I need to amend my previous statement: I said $5.4 billion, in 2018 it was $624 million. That's a bad number I got somewhere.

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

One of the reasons I voted for his was to stop payments to the U.N.

That was MY mandate to him.


Plus, given that the UN is very anti-US / not friendly to the US, it doesn't hurt for the UN to suffer when the US decides not to give them money.

Maybe in the future they'll consider who pays the bills.


Nah, they'll always be anti-America.

(10-09-2019 03:19 PM)gdunn Wrote:  While you're pondering your response FBO.. Think on this as well.. The UN doesn't have enough funds to possibly make it through October as it stands, and have cut out all travel unless it's deemed essential, so what all are they doing that's non-essential? And how do you piss through that kind of money?

I'm sure there is massive excess in their expenditures. And yes, this isn't just Trump. We've been at odds with our bills to the U.N. for decades now. But we have always ended up paying them (I believe) up until now.

IMO, the U.N. continues to do very important work in worldwide humanitarian efforts. And lately, they've released some very important work in the field of climate change. I'm sure they can pay their bills with some fundraising.

But again, leaving the U.N. (and I believe deciding not to pay our bills) should be left up to Congress and not President Trump. Ron Paul certainly tried his best to leave the U.N., but he never was able to gain any support for his bill.

(10-09-2019 05:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 03:19 PM)gdunn Wrote:  While you're pondering your response FBO.. Think on this as well.. The UN doesn't have enough funds to possibly make it through October as it stands, and have cut out all travel unless it's deemed essential, so what all are they doing that's non-essential? And how do you piss through that kind of money?

I'm sure there is massive excess in their expenditures. And yes, this isn't just Trump. We've been at odds with our bills to the U.N. for decades now. But we have always ended up paying them (I believe) up until now.

IMO, the U.N. continues to do very important work in worldwide humanitarian efforts. And lately, they've released some very important work in the field of climate change. I'm sure they can pay their bills with some fundraising.

But again, leaving the U.N. (and I believe deciding not to pay our bills) should be left up to Congress and not President Trump. Ron Paul certainly tried his best to leave the U.N., but he never was able to gain any support for his bill.

Again why should we pay most of the tab when most of them hate us, supply them with a military, and a place to meet where they’re free to do whatever and all would laugh if our country fails?

(10-09-2019 03:11 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:57 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 02:55 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Syria has paid its dues from what I saw. The U.S. owes the U.N. a billion dollars.

Nice of Trump to make that decision to not pay the bill by himself. What part of not having a mandate does he not understand?

Why does the US have to pay 22% of the bill (almost $5.4 Billion) when we don't need the UN and they hate us?

I mean think of all the social programs your ilk could implement with $5.4 Billion.. And what has the UN does for the US lately besides take up parking in NY and make the city more miserable when they meet?

That's a matter for Congress to decide, not President Trump (and they have worked on legislation in the past such as the Helms-Biden Bill in 1999 to reduce the load from 25 (or maybe 28 percent) to 22 percent.

Bring your case to the Senate and get a bill passed there on reducing the U.S. input. And then see what the House does after that. Isn't that how legislation is supposed to work?

After the 2016 election, 55 percent of Republicans, 78 percent of Independents and 84 percent of Democrats supported the U.S. paying our dues to the U.N. on time and in full.

https://betterworldcampaign.org/us-un-pa...s-un-poll/

I am sure Trump has a pen and a phone.

(10-09-2019 06:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 05:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 03:19 PM)gdunn Wrote:  While you're pondering your response FBO.. Think on this as well.. The UN doesn't have enough funds to possibly make it through October as it stands, and have cut out all travel unless it's deemed essential, so what all are they doing that's non-essential? And how do you piss through that kind of money?

I'm sure there is massive excess in their expenditures. And yes, this isn't just Trump. We've been at odds with our bills to the U.N. for decades now. But we have always ended up paying them (I believe) up until now.

IMO, the U.N. continues to do very important work in worldwide humanitarian efforts. And lately, they've released some very important work in the field of climate change. I'm sure they can pay their bills with some fundraising.

But again, leaving the U.N. (and I believe deciding not to pay our bills) should be left up to Congress and not President Trump. Ron Paul certainly tried his best to leave the U.N., but he never was able to gain any support for his bill.

Again why should we pay most of the tab when most of them hate us, supply them with a military, and a place to meet where they’re free to do whatever and all would laugh if our country fails?

'Most of the tab' is a bit of an exaggeration. Yes, we have the biggest bill, but 22 percent is not what I would call most. If we were paying above half, yes I think you could say that. We also don't provide hardly any of the soldiers who make up the UN peacekeeping troops. That 'military' is more than 100,000 strong and we are not among the top 25 countries in terms of who provides that peacekeeping group.

Here's the list of where they come from if you're interested - Ethiopia, India and Pakistan are the top three countries. We do provide the most money to pay those peacekeepers (28 percent, followed by China at 10 percent and Japan just under 10 percent).

https://bestdelegate.com/united-nations-...d-funding/

(10-09-2019 07:00 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 06:51 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 05:05 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(10-09-2019 03:19 PM)gdunn Wrote:  While you're pondering your response FBO.. Think on this as well.. The UN doesn't have enough funds to possibly make it through October as it stands, and have cut out all travel unless it's deemed essential, so what all are they doing that's non-essential? And how do you piss through that kind of money?

I'm sure there is massive excess in their expenditures. And yes, this isn't just Trump. We've been at odds with our bills to the U.N. for decades now. But we have always ended up paying them (I believe) up until now.

IMO, the U.N. continues to do very important work in worldwide humanitarian efforts. And lately, they've released some very important work in the field of climate change. I'm sure they can pay their bills with some fundraising.

But again, leaving the U.N. (and I believe deciding not to pay our bills) should be left up to Congress and not President Trump. Ron Paul certainly tried his best to leave the U.N., but he never was able to gain any support for his bill.

Again why should we pay most of the tab when most of them hate us, supply them with a military, and a place to meet where they’re free to do whatever and all would laugh if our country fails?

'Most of the tab' is a bit of an exaggeration. Yes, we have the biggest bill, but 22 percent is not what I would call most. If we were paying above half, yes I think you could say that. We also don't provide hardly any of the soldiers who make up the UN peacekeeping troops. That 'military' is more than 100,000 strong and we are not among the top 25 countries in terms of who provides that peacekeeping group.

Here's the list of where they come from if you're interested - Ethiopia, India and Pakistan are the top three countries. We do provide the most money to pay those peacekeepers (28 percent, followed by China at 10 percent and Japan just under 10 percent).

https://bestdelegate.com/united-nations-...d-funding/

K. I’ll give you that. But don’t you think we pay way more than other countries?

Good to see that the UN is nearly as financially bankrupt as it has been morally bankrupt for decades