A better way of looking at fairness of aid given to Ukraine rather than in absolute terms is by proportion of GDP. Denmark on this basis is the top donor (1.83% GDP)and the US (0.35%) is way down the list (16th). UK gave 0.45%, Germany 0.37%, Canada 0.39%,
Denmark and Estonia had the highest ratio of bilateral support to Ukraine to donor GDP as of February 2025. Poland ranked eighth by GDP share of aid to Ukraine.
www.statista.com
The Ukraine Support Tracker lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid promised by governments to Ukraine.
www.ifw-kiel.de
Just as a general comment on this, which applies to ANY federal spending for ANYTHING at all:
Also, remember that its the blue states (and only 2 red states: Texas and Florida - barely) that contributes positively to the US treasury. Every single blue liberal states pay more in taxes than we receive back from the federal government. And every single red state receives more from the federal government than they pay in. And yet, it's the RED STATES the ones that whine the most about federal spending!
And even then, most of the wealth that the red states do generate, are generated in their big blue southern and midwestern red state cities: Dallas, Houston, Miami, Orlando, Atlanta, Nashville, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Louisville, St. Louis, Indianapolis, etc, etc, etc, etc.
More than 70% of Americans reside in those small little blue dots, generating 95% of the nation's wealth. With 30% of the nation only generating 5% of the wealth.
Meanwhile, those 30% of Americans, are WAAAAYYY over-represented in the federal government. In the Senate in particular, of course, but also in the House due to small states being guaranteed a minimum of 3 representatives, and the total number of representatives being artificially capped at 435. Which means the House is NOT balanced based on state population the way it is meant to be. The district with the largest population it represents, is from Delaware at nearly 990,000 people. The average is 761,000. And the smallest is a district in Montana with just 542,000. The blue Delaware district has nearly 65% MORE people it represents than the small Montana district.
And yet, red staters STILL think that they should have MORE representation, as well as complete and constant control over all of that blue state wealth that WE create!
Blue states are the ones that see the importance of keeping Russia in check; to keep them from being tempted to expand this war by making it as prohibitively as expensive for Russia as we possibly can. In a recent essay of mine in this thread, I talked a lot about how this is financially killing Russia far more than it is Europe and especially the United States. Add in the fact that Russia is losing lots of manpower, not only for their armed forces, but also for their factories on top of what the government is spending, and all of the lost revenue and profits for their private industries with all of the sanctions. The loss of manpower to the front, and to death and dismemberment of individual soldiers to the tune of millions now, is lost productivity back home. Also, will put a big strain on their health care system, not just now, but in the future for at least an entire generation. They will be having a lot of disabled veterans, and a lot of physically healthy ones with major mental damage to deal with: extreme depression, PTSD, alcoholism, domestic abuse, homelessness, unable to work, etc, etc, etc.
Red states think they are entitled to tell their financial benefactors (all of the blue states) that we can't spend federal dollars on national infrastructure, education, healthcare, food stamps, social security, and that we cannot tax the billionaires like we used to in the 20th century that kept the government solvent and the entire economy prosperous for literal decades at a time.
How the ◊◊◊◊ did we, the more powerful, populous, and wealthy states, give up all of our power to the small poo-dunky ◊◊◊◊◊◊ little states that can't even run their own economies, never mind the national economy?