The Problem With NATO in One Chart

NATO defense spending chart for visual learners: How much countries have spent on Defense compared to the target amount that is required/expected of them as Members of NATO ( North Atlantic Treaty Organization).
Very lopsided/unfair, no?

The members agreed that an armed attack [including CYBERWARFARE] against any one of them in Europe or North America would be considered an attack against them all. Consequently, they agreed that, if an armed attack occurred, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence, would assist the member being attacked, taking such action as it deemed necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. The treaty does not require members to respond with military action against an aggressor. Although obliged to respond, they maintain the freedom to choose the method by which they do so. - wikipedia

The United States has spent the seven decades in the post-World War II era going above and beyond the call of duty in providing security and financial aid around the world. Since 1949, our steadfast allies in NATO have gotten used to America doing more and more for everyone, while expecting little in return - Fox News

Why Mr Trump is Right About NATO

At the 2018 NATO Summit

NATO Military Alliance

NATO Members




****

President Obama Had Worst Economic Record In Decades

pc: wikipedia

The news is out – but it’s something we’ve suspected for a long time.

Under Barack Obama, America experienced the worst economic growth of any president since World War II.

The U.S. economy grew a pathetic 1.6 percent annually during the eight years Obama occupied the White House. One has to go back to Herbert Hoover to find a more dismal growth rate.

The former president’s best year was 2015, when the economy grew at 2.6 percent after rising from 2.4 percent the year prior, The New York Post reports

Since World War II, there have been 13 presidents, starting with Harry Truman, who began his administration in the aftermath of a great world war, and yet he still bested Obama on economic growth.

Being the absolute worst of 13 presidents is no small matter. Barack Obama had eight years to get the economy back in shape. George H.W. Bush and the terrible Jimmy Carter only had four years and even they did better than Obama.

Here – according to The Post – are the average growth rates for each President:

• Johnson (1964-68), 5.3 percent
• Kennedy (1961-63), 4.3 percent
• Clinton (1993-2000), 3.9 percent
• Reagan (1981-88), 3.5 percent
• Carter (1977-80), 3.3 percent
• Eisenhower (1953-60), 3 percent
• Nixon (1969-74), 2.8 percent
• Ford (1975-76), 2.6 percent
• G.H.W. Bush (1989-92), 2.3 percent
• G.W. Bush (2001-08), 2.1 percent
• Truman (1946-52), 1.7 percent
• Obama (2009-16), 1.6 percent

On the flip side of the Coin, the first two months of Donald Trump’s administration appears to be headed in the right economic direction. Jobs are up, economic numbers are down, unemployment is down and there is record optimism in the future.

Barack Obama's Had Worst Economic Record in Decades

New York Post: GDP Growth Under Obama Was Worst in Decades

What is GDP?

***********

38.06.30.17

Prediction of the Richest Cities in the World in the Near Future

These cities are suppose to be the richest cities in the world in the next 10 years. Before you plan to buy properties there consider these thoughts:

1) Doha,Qatar - I disagree with this one. Even though it was growing so fast, the price of oil which is its main source of income is down and will continue to be in the $40 or lower range for a long time. This place was over built when oil was $150/barrel.

2) Bergen, Norway

3)Trondheim, Norway - I agree with these two Norwegian cities, but not as rich as some had predicted. These two cities are financial hubs of Norway...a country most blessed by the North Sea oil bonanza. The Norwegians , however, did a very smart thing ... they invested their oil profits. They created their sovereign fund which is now one of the biggest in the world and worth hundreds of billions. They are not dependent on their oil revenues for continued prosperity.

4) Hwaseong, South Korea

5) Asan, South Korea - I agree with these ones. South Korea has one of the most vibrant economies of the world...thanks to very smart economic policies of South Korean Government. If the U.S.A. would just adopt same economic policies, we would truly Make America Great Again.

6) Macau, China - This is a wild card. It was the richest one a few years ago but the Chinese Government clamped down on its gambling Industry because of its corrosive effect on the Chinese people ( Asians are some of the biggest gamblers in the world. Its genetic). However, the Chinese are a resourceful people. The same genes that makes them gamble, makes them take risky but lucrative ventures.

Blessings for the day: The promises and gifts of God are irrevocable.

Willie P -  07/31/2016

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwaseong,_Gyeonggi#/media/File:Gyeonggi-Hwaseong.svg

I wanted to put my friend's thoughts down in my blog for the record.  He's been wrong concerning a variety of subjects; but he's also been right and is very knowledgeable. I want to see how accurate he is in his assessment of these countries' wealth in ten years, God willing. -- Mrs E