Originally Posted by frostwolfex
consider it this way, consider the us a big football player with a really big lunch, and australia is a smaller soccer player with a more medium sized lunch. a poor kid comes in and the us gives one of their 5 sandwiches, whereas aus gives half of its only sandwich. Now proportionally the soccer player gave more, but the poor kid got a whole sandwich from the footballer and half a sandwich from the soccer player, so in real world application, who helped the poor kids hunger more? the poor kid is liikely thankful to both, since neither had any obligation to help him outside of theoretical moral ones, but he still got a sandwich and a half(plus a quarter of one from the scrawney band nerd-the eu :D )