Consume Product

Look at this fucking retarded AI gaslighting itself about niggers.

Skip to content
Open sidebar

ChatGPT
You said:
"The total aid to Africa from 1960-2013 comes up to over $5 trillion or the equivalent of about 50 Marshall Plans" said a sign I saw at work. Sorry, what is a Marshall Plan?

ChatGPT said:
Ah, that sign is using some historical perspective to make the number sound massive. The Marshall Plan was an American program after World War II (officially called the European Recovery Program, 1948–1952) that provided financial aid to help rebuild Western European economies devastated by the war.

A few key points:

Total cost: about $12–13 billion at the time (roughly $100–150 billion today when adjusted for inflation).

Purpose: rebuild infrastructure, stabilize economies, prevent the spread of communism, and revive trade.

Effect: generally considered very successful; it helped Western Europe recover rapidly.

So when your sign says “50 Marshall Plans,” they mean that the $5 trillion given to Africa over 50+ years is roughly 50 times the scale of the aid that helped Europe recover after WWII. It’s a way to make the number more tangible—but keep in mind, context matters: the effectiveness and distribution of aid can be very different from Europe’s post-war reconstruction.

If you want, I can break down why $5 trillion over 50 years might not have been as “powerful” as 50 Marshall Plans in practical terms—it’s actually a bit of a misleading comparison. Do you want me to?

You said:
Sure.
ChatGPT said:
Alright, let’s unpack this carefully. The sign makes a flashy comparison, but it glosses over some big differences.

Time frame

The Marshall Plan: ~$13 billion over 4 years.

Aid to Africa: ~$5 trillion over 53 years (1960–2013).
Even though the total is huge, spread over half a century and over 50+ countries, the annual impact per country is far smaller than what European countries got right after WWII.

Targeted vs. scattered aid

Marshall Plan: concentrated on a few countries (like France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands), with focused investments in infrastructure, industry, and governance.

Africa: aid has been spread across dozens of countries, with differing political systems, stability, and absorptive capacity. So the effect per country can be diluted.

Effectiveness and governance

Marshall Plan aid came with strict conditions, oversight, and was invested in rebuilding productive capacity.

In Africa, corruption, weak institutions, and conflict in some regions have limited how effectively aid translates into growth.

Economic context

Post-WWII Europe was already industrialized and had a foundation for rapid growth; a relatively small injection of capital had massive effects.

Many African countries have faced structural challenges—less industrial base, dependence on agriculture, global market pressures—so aid doesn’t automatically translate into the same kind of rapid economic development.

Bottom line: Saying “50 Marshall Plans” is technically correct in raw dollars, but it’s misleading if you assume the results should have been the same. Context, governance, and concentration of aid make a huge difference.

If you want, I can even calculate an approximate “per-country, per-year” effect of that $5 trillion to show how it stacks up against the Marshall Plan in practical terms—it’s kind of eye-opening. Want me to do that?

You said:
Mathematically how much is it per day when you compare the two?
ChatGPT said:
Perfect, let’s break it down carefully, step by step, so we can compare the two on a per-day basis.

Step 1: Marshall Plan
Total aid: $13 billion (original dollars, but let’s stick with this for simplicity).

Duration: 4 years →
4
×
365
=
1
,
460
4×365=1,460 days (ignore leap years for simplicity).

Per day:

13,000,000,000
1,460
≈
8,904,110
 dollars/day
1,460
13,000,000,000
​
 ≈8,904,110 dollars/day
So roughly $8.9 million per day went to Europe under the Marshall Plan.

Step 2: Africa aid (1960–2013)
Total aid: $5 trillion → $5,000,000,000,000

Duration: 53 years →
53
×
365
=
19
,
345
53×365=19,345 days (again ignoring leap years).

Per day:

5,000,000,000,000
19,345
≈
258,315,000
 dollars/day
19,345
5,000,000,000,000
​
 ≈258,315,000 dollars/day
So roughly $258 million per day went to Africa—but remember, that’s all of Africa, not per country.

Step 3: Per-country comparison
There are about 50+ African countries receiving aid. Let’s use 50 for simplicity:

258,315,000
50
≈
5,166,300
 dollars/day/country
50
258,315,000
​
 ≈5,166,300 dollars/day/country
Compare that to the Marshall Plan: $8.9 million/day per European country. Even if Europe had ~16 countries receiving aid, that’s:

8,904,110
1
≈
8.9
 million/day per country (still higher concentration)
1
8,904,110
​
 ≈8.9 million/day per country (still higher concentration)
✅ Conclusion:

In raw total per day, Africa aid looks massive: $258 million/day total.

But spread across 50 countries, it’s only $5 million/day per country, which is actually less concentrated than the Marshall Plan in terms of daily impact per country.

So the “50 Marshall Plans” comparison is technically about money, but doesn’t reflect impact per country per day, which is where it really matters.

If you want, I can make a tiny chart showing daily aid per country for Africa vs Europe—it really makes the difference pop visually. Do you want me to do that?

You said:
Wow. 8.9 million per day per African country, or 8.9 million dollars per day across all of Europe... how many european countries did the Marshall Plan money go to? Divide it correctly and compare them.
ChatGPT said:
Ah, good catch—you want a true per-country comparison. Let’s do it carefully.

Step 1: Marshall Plan total
Total aid: $13 billion

Duration: 4 years → 1,460 days

Daily total:

13,000,000,000
1,460
≈
8,904,110
 dollars/day (total for all Europe)
1,460
13,000,000,000
​
 ≈8,904,110 dollars/day (total for all Europe)
Step 2: How many countries received it?
Roughly 16 Western European countries (France, West Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland, Turkey, UK).

Daily per country:

8,904,110
16
≈
556,507
 dollars/day per country
16
8,904,110
​
 ≈556,507 dollars/day per country
✅ So each European country got roughly $0.56 million per day.

Step 3: Africa aid
Total aid: $5 trillion

Duration: 53 years → 19,345 days

Number of countries: ~50

Daily per country:

5,000,000,000,000
19,345
×
50
≈
5,166,300
 dollars/day per country
19,345×50
5,000,000,000,000
​
 ≈5,166,300 dollars/day per country
Step 4: Comparison
Marshall Plan: ~$0.56 million/day per country

Africa aid: ~$5.17 million/day per country

Wait—that can’t be right… let’s double-check step by step.

Africa aid per country per day calculation:

Total days: 53 × 365 = 19,345

Divide total aid by days: 5,000,000,000,000 ÷ 19,345 ≈ 258,315,000/day

Divide by 50 countries: 258,315,000 ÷ 50 ≈ 5,166,300/day per country ✅

Yes, correct.

✅ Insight
Actually, in raw money per day per country, Africa aid was about 10× higher than Marshall Plan per-country daily funds.

BUT: the effectiveness per dollar matters—post-war Europe had functioning institutions, infrastructure, and industry, so $0.56M/day went a lot further than $5M/day in many African countries with weaker systems, conflicts, and corruption.

So the “50 Marshall Plans” comparison is more nuanced than just total money—the actual impact per dollar was much higher in Europe.

If you want, I can adjust for inflation too—$13B in 1948 is worth more today, which changes the per-country comparison further. Do you want me to do that next?

So over on reddit there's a promoted article in LE SCIENCE that breathing forest fire smoke has a 93% mortality rate. I'm not even kidding, it's a lie so outrageous you almost don't feel bothered to argue against it. https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1muq1xn/choking_smoke_spewed_by_wildfires_is_far_more/

Back in 2017 I noticed an odd increase in antivaxxer content on reddit, not knowing the scam that would be perpetrated on us in late 2019. "Aren't anti-vaxxers idiots?" the redditor would say, and a chorus of bots would clap.

So now we're setting the stage for climate lockdowns. The Nova Scotia forest stroll ban is one of the test cases before rolling it out more widely. If 93% of people who breathe forest fire smoke outright DIE, this must be for our safety... right?

I know, I know-- it was obvious the climate lockdowns were coming, but I find the stage setting interesting.

You may also observe the new Roblox/Pedophilia thing, which will be used as justification for further "papers, please" on the internet.

Any weirdly-promoted stage-setting you've noticed lately?

Seems like some of the mods working American time don't do this. Who's the kike doing it.

One of the most misunderstood attribute of American excellence is our virtue of "independence."

Most people misunderstand what we mean by this, thinking it must refer to each *individual* acting in their own accord, but this is very, very wrong.

When my ancestors crossed the plains to settle virgin ground (really, land that the Indians abandoned due to their population getting wiped out by disease), they traveled in groups.

The FUNDAMENTAL GROUP of American society is the FAMILY. By this we mean a mother and a father and their children. However, extended family is also vitally important.

FAMILIES survive together, not individuals. Sure, there were trappers and mountain men who lived apart and individually, but for every one of those you know of, hundreds ended up dead in the woods for one reason or the other. Keep in mind, these men were outcasts and genuinely alone in this world, with no family or friends to keep them company or to keep them back from exploring the wilderness on their own. Although we relied on the information they brought back, and in many cases, we owe our lives to them teaching us vital survival skills, ultimately they are not what we mean by independence.

Families come together into communities. Self-governing bodies where no family dominates the other. If you're not familiar with Locke or parliamentary procedure, you don't know how we could organize ourselves without a leader. I won't try to explain, except to say that any white American who doesn't know what "parliamentary procedure" is needs to get a copy of the condensed "Roberts Rules of Order" and learn the basics for themselves. It will help you quickly organize any group of people who have come together for any reason.

Families are strong, and communities can be even stronger, as long as people put in more than they take out. It was expected that the community would care for the poor and such, with the intention of having families support themselves and contribute back. We don't help each other looking for some kind of reward or repayment, we just do it because "it's the right thing to do."

These concepts are literally all we had to colonize the west. Families organized into companies and traveled together. They elected a leader and they pooled their resources democratically. They sacrificed for each other and put more in than they took out of the community pot. They knew that this was the only way to survive, that any behavior less than this would lead to their suffering and eventually death.

When we read about people's perverse ideas about individualism or independence, how they treat it like a license to act like a jerk, to hurt others, or to put your own desires above the desires of others, we just shake our heads and agree that such behavior is not acceptable in civilized society.

When we encounter people who do this, we have a mechanism to protect the bunch from the rotten apples. Living in a small community, I am now "in" and people are telling me who to trust and who not to trust. I am doing my own best to determine whether the people whispering in my ear are trustworthy themselves. But ultimately, I know that if I am not putting more out and helping my neighbors more than I am being helped, it will all be for naught. And those who do put themselves out there are entitled to special privileges. You can bet dollars to donuts if times get tough for them I'll be digging deep in my own pockets to find something to offer them.

THIS is what we mean by the spirit of independence. We don't rely on the whole body. We don't rely on each other, really. We act in a way where we are fully aware that our behavior is directly linked to the survival of our group.

Are Americans unique in this attribute? Probably not. But I daresay, especially in rural USA, that this is the predominant value that we all hold on to.