Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Muckmaw1 on December 28, 2004, 09:44:30 AM
-
U.N. official slams U.S. as 'stingy' over aid
By Bill Sammon
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The Bush administration yesterday pledged $15 million to Asian nations hit by a tsunami that has killed more than 22,500 people, although the United Nations' humanitarian-aid chief called the donation "stingy."
"The United States, at the president's direction, will be a leading partner in one of the most significant relief, rescue and recovery challenges that the world has ever known," said White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy.
But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
Entire article:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041228-122330-7268r.htm
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
Holy cripes.
Hey Jan....I'm not American, but I will say a hearty "F U" to your suggestion.
-
Curval, what are you drinking? Jack and coke here.
Karaya
-
Egg nog...and black rum. ;)
-
Jebus, it's not even noon yet!
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Jebus, it's not even noon yet!
-SW
Wulfe, now hush up. I'm getting the first round for Curval and you. What'll it be?
Karaya
-
US adds $20 million to quake aid donation
By Barry Schweid, Associated Press | December 28, 2004
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Agency for International Development prepared Tuesday to add $20 million to an initial $15 million contribution for Asian earthquake relief as Secretary of State Colin Powell bristled at a United Nations official's suggestion that the United States has been ''stingy.''
A senior U.S. official told The Associated Press the increased aid figure was bound to be pushed even higher as assessments of the damage from the biggest earthquake in 40 years are received.
The Pentagon is preparing a supplemental relief operation and pre-stocked supplies of shelter, food and water bags are on their way to Indonesia from Dubai, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Powell, irritated by the U.N. official's criticism, toured morning television talk shows to say the Bush administration will follow up its contributions with large additional sums.
.''The United States has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world,'' Powell said when asked about the comments Monday by Jan Egeland, the U.N. humanitarian aid chief.
Initially, the U.S. government pledged $15 million and dispatched disaster specialists to help the Asian nations devastated by a massive earthquake and tsunamis that claimed tens of thousands of lives.
On Monday, President Bush sent letters of condolence and Powell called the disaster an ''international tragedy'' as he laid out the initial American aid efforts.
Appearing Tuesday on ABC's ''Good Morning America,'' the secretary said that at least 11 Americans have died in the disaster and hundreds remain unaccounted for.
Powell chafed at statements that Egeland made at a Monday news conference, at which the humanitarian aid chief exhorted ''rich'' nations to do more.
''We were more generous when we were less rich, many of the rich countries,'' Egeland said. ''And it is beyond me, why are we so stingy, really ... Even Christmas time should remind many Western countries at least how rich we have become.''
Asked about this on ABC, Powell said, ''We will do more. I wish that comment hadn't been made.''
''We'll make an assessment as the days go by, to see what more is needed of us,'' he said. ''It will take us awhile to make a careful assessment of what is needed ... to see what the specific needs are and then we will respond to those needs.''
In an interview on NBC''s ''Today'' show Tuesday, Powell said that ''clearly, the United States will be a major contributor to this international effort. And, yes, it will run into the billions of dollars.''
From his ranch in Crawford, Texas on Monday, Bush had sent letters of condolence to the leaders of the seven countries wracked by the disaster.
''This is a terrible tragedy,'' White House spokesman Trent Duffy said. ''There is a significant loss of life. And our thoughts and prayers are with all those who are suffering.
Millions of people who were displaced will need shelter, food and clothing, Fox added. The $15 million U.S. contribution was an initial one, he said, issued while surveys were conducted.
The Australian government pledged $7.6 million in immediate aid.
A spokesman at U.S. Pacific Command in Hawaii said Monday that in addition to three Navy P-3 Orion surveillance planes sent to Thailand, the military also is loading five or six Air Force C-130 cargo planes with tents, clothing, food and other humanitarian goods for delivery to Thailand.
Pacific Command also is assembling small assessment teams that will be dispatched to three countries in the region to assess how U.S. military resources can best be applied in those countries.
Pacific Command spokesman Lt. Col. William Bigelow said he was not authorized to identify the three countries, but other government officials said they were Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Thailand.
And James D. Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank, said bank teams were discussing potential assistance with the governments of the countries that suffered losses.
On Sunday, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Rodrigo de Rato, said the Fund ''stands ready to do its part to assist these nations with appropriate support in their time of need.''
The U.S. Navy said it sent three P-3 surveillance aircraft from Kadena air base on the Japanese island of Okinawa to Utaphao, Thailand, to conduct survey operations, and possibly aid in search-and-rescue efforts
-
typical of the UN. Insult the people/nation that provides money and relief. I bet the UN takes a chunk of the money we send for "administrative costs", I just wonder how much money that goes to relief actually pays for UN operating costs.
-
The western world could do so much more Muckmaw, and you "forgot" to mention in your headline that he didnt slam only the U.S. but the wester world in general.
-
nilsen, what happened to the flowery hat avatar? :(
-
That is increadably. I hope that idiot is fired.
-
Too bad that Oil for Food program wasn't still up and running in Iraq, some of those UN officials could give alittle bit of the skimming profits to the relief agencies....:D
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
The western world could do so much more Muckmaw, and you "forgot" to mention in your headline that he didnt slam only the U.S. but the wester world in general.
I Just cut and paste the headline from the Washington Times link.
-
Originally posted by Furball
nilsen, what happened to the flowery hat avatar? :(
went away
-
Originally posted by Pongo
That is increadably. I hope that idiot is fired.
Jan Egeland? nope... he stays right were he is.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Too bad that Oil for Food program wasn't still up and running in Iraq, some of those UN officials could give alittle bit of the skimming profits to the relief agencies....:D
You acusing Jan Egeland of skimming? Give me a link.
-
i would like to see how much donated other countries, instead of *****ing someone that he didnt donate enough.
However there are many otherways, how to help.. provide human resources, rescue teams, army and so on..
http://news.google.com/news?q=rescue+team+to+asia&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=nn&oi=newsr
-
Originally posted by lada
i would like to see how much donated other countries, instead of *****ing someone that he didnt donate enough.
However there are many otherways, how to help.. provide human resources, rescue teams, army and so on..
http://news.google.com/news?q=rescue+team+to+asia&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=nn&oi=newsr
The United States dispatched disaster teams and prepared a $15 million aid package to the Asian countries, and the 25-nation European Union promised to deliver $4 million. Japan, Portugal, China and Russia were sending teams of experts.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
The United States dispatched disaster teams and prepared a $15 million aid package to the Asian countries, and the 25-nation European Union promised to deliver $4 million. Japan, Portugal, China and Russia were sending teams of experts.
some links will be appriciated
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
You acusing Jan Egeland of skimming? Give me a link.
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Too bad that Oil for Food program wasn't still up and running in Iraq, some of those UN officials could give alittle bit of the skimming profits to the relief agencies....:D
-
Taken from the Kansas City Star on the front page from an AP Wire article.
-
actually, compared to the 97milion Japan has pledged (foxnews.com), it is stingy.
Japan probably has an economic interest in the recovery of SE Asia but still, I think countries like the US can do better.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
went away
:(
-
LOL It's the UN so like who cares what they say any way?
-
Some UN guy wants to raise our taxes... Didn't we give the finger and the boot to the last off-continent landlords who did that?
We always follow-up with long term aid programs after the initial assistance push, plus our tourism dollars helped build the region in the first place and will play a key role in rebuilding it after the disaster, so I think people at the UN are more interested in trying to make us look bad than they are in the welfare of those in the disaster area. Shame on them, but unsuprisingly it's what most Americans expect from the UN.
-
Originally posted by Furball
:(
Don't be sad. It's in a happy place were children are playing and eating candy all day.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
LOL It's the UN so like who cares what they say any way?
yeah, let's do away with the UN. Let's make the world same as it was before WW2. Times were soooo much better then.
-
The U.N. is just waste imo. It needs to be "rebuilt" from the ground up. If we didn't help we would get critized for it. And when we do help we get critized. It has always been like this. Although 15 millon does seem a little low. I bet more will be giving over time.
-
Originally posted by spitfiremkv
yeah, let's do away with the UN. Let's make the world same as it was before WW2. Times were soooo much better then.
The UN has outlived its usefulness just like Unions...as Jay said above, it needs to be rebuilt bottom up. The UN is a joke.
-
Heard on CNN we are sending a aircraft carrier and a couple other ships to them with some heavy lify helo's.
Hey America is doing it's fair part.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
The UN has outlived its usefulness just like Unions...as Jay said above, it needs to be rebuilt bottom up. The UN is a joke.
UN is a joke only seems popular since Bush's confrintation with them over Iraq. Ever since then it seems popular amongst Bush supporters to slag the UN which they probably no very little about other then following what Bush and Fox have to say of course.
....-Gixer
-
Nope. Lots of folks think the UN has been a major joke since long before Bosnia.
It's just an old joke now.
-
Originally posted by Gixer
UN is a joke only seems popular since Bush's confrintation with them over Iraq. Ever since then it seems popular amongst Bush supporters to slag the UN which they probably no very little about other then following what Bush and Fox have to say of course.
....-Gixer
I don't know about that gixer. I've been seeing "get US out of the UN" signs since I was a boy, 40 or so years ago. There has always been an anti-UN movement in the US, for good reasons IMO.
The UN has only taken from the US, and never provided anything in the way of assistance. Where was the UN during the hurricanes last year?
-
The U.S. needs to send over about a million canteens with a month's supply of chlorine tablets. Anything else will not prevent deaths.
-
I fail to see why any nation is providing econmic aid, India, Indonesia and Thailand all have plenty of $$$$.
If India has enough money for a nuke program....
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
The U.S. needs to send over about a million canteens with a month's supply of chlorine tablets. Anything else will not prevent deaths.
Considering proximity & cost of manufacturing, wouldn't it be cheaper & faster for, say, China to send over 1 million canteens? Maybe their team of experts will reccomend it.
-
Originally posted by indy007
Considering proximity & cost of manufacturing, wouldn't it be cheaper & faster for, say, China to send over 1 million canteens? Maybe their team of experts will reccomend it.
China? :lol
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
You acusing Jan Egeland of skimming? Give me a link.
No were accusing him of being a pompous moron, but then that would cover most of the U.N.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
China? :lol
Karaya
I really wish sarcasm carried better over text :)
-
Here is a thought:
Let's stop counting, stop fighting about stinginess, and start writing checks?
We wrote a check to the Red Cross today.
-
yep.. more than 60 000 dead so far...
-
The U.S. currently foots about 1/4 of the U.N.'s costs. Additionally the U.S. provides billions a year in funding foreign releif organizations. Added to this the U.S. funds it's own foreign releif organizations for releiving foreign countries releif organizations. There is quite a bit of funding in play for disasters just like this at all times.
I think I've paid enough taxes for this year. Come 01/01/2005 my pockets get picked again to pay for the $Billions not "APPLAUDED" by the world press the U.S. has already put into play since 01/01/2004.
I am a card carrying member of the worlds most dispised class. The U.S. middle class. The tax paying base that makes it possible for the rest of the world to say we aren't paying enough. By all means those who are suffering in this moment of need should be helped. But we Americans have paid enough.
WHAT YOU SEE IN THE MEDIA IS COSMETIC. NO OTHER COUNTRY GIVES THE BILLIONS A YEAR THE UNITED STATES DOES EACH AND EVERY YEAR BEHIND THE SCEANS.
-
We will barrow all the aid money we can from China and Japan.
-
Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
I love the part about raising taxes so more money could be spent on foriegn aid. What a jackarse.
-
LOL, look at this gem from the same article:
he said, adding that politicians in the United States and Europe "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."
What a moron. No wonder some European countries love to tax the hell out of their people.
-
Originally posted by bustr
The U.S. currently foots about 1/4 of the U.N.'s costs. Additionally the U.S. provides billions a year in funding foreign releif organizations. Added to this the U.S. funds it's own foreign releif organizations for releiving foreign countries releif organizations. There is quite a bit of funding in play for disasters just like this at all times.
Actually I think in comparisson for the US and the other top 10 GDP countries in the world they all contribute about .001% of their GDP on the UN and other foreign aid agencies in a year. And I think on a GDP per person basis US is one of the lowest. Compare that to military spending and it's pretty pitifull.
Funny how governments can always find billions for senseless wars like Iraq yet for aid after one of the worlds greatest natural distasters and they can only find a few million.
...-Gixer
l
-
A pity that those wishing to give aid are so often bashed for their support.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm
Also, while a terrible tragedy, this doesn't make the top 50 for worst, my friend.
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Funny how governments can always find billions for senseless wars like Iraq yet for aid after one of the worlds greatest natural distasters and they can only find a few million.
You mean like India's nuclear weapons program, or Indonesia's military budget?
-
Spit that was a 100 million yen from Japans Red Cross which isn't much. I've also seen reports of approximately 30 million US Dollars.
Either way it's amazing how many folks will bash the US for their lack of help or aid. Maybe we should just send some boats and some planes filled with 11 tons or so of materials and call it good like the other countries.
Funny how so many people say they don't want the US as the worlds police. Why should we be the worlds emergency bank account too? I feel for these people that have endured this tragedy but take your country bashing somewhere else.
It is also amazing how a country who's calling out for help pushes away any kind of help from a particular country because of their past issues with them.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
You mean like India's nuclear weapons program, or Indonesia's military budget?
That kind of sums it up pretty well for me.
-
I wish the US would withdraw from the UN and evict it.
-
70,000 people dead???
-
Donated to the American Red Cross International Relief Fund. My wife is sleeping right now and has no idea. I just hope the insanity stops.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by spitfiremkv
actually, compared to the 97milion Japan has pledged (foxnews.com), it is stingy.
Japan probably has an economic interest in the recovery of SE Asia but still, I think countries like the US can do better.
97 million??? I believe that it was 30 million.
Egeland (a Norwegian) was full of baloney and he knew it because he spent all day today back-tracking.
Simple facts:
Only a small percentage of U.S. aid is counted by the UN. They exclude food aid, of which the U.S. regularly gives 2.5 times the total (measured in dollar value) provided by the rest of the entire planet. The UN also discounts private contributions to relief organizations and charities, which totals more than that given by the U.S. government in terms of dollars.
On the UN's list of 25 leading nations in humanitarian aid, it seems that Norway is on top because it gives 0.9% of its nominal GNP as foreign aid. The UN claims that the U.S. only gives 0.19% of its GNP as aid. However, when you factor in food aid and private contributions the U.S. rises to the top by a significant margin (3.2%). Egeland had the audacity to suggest that Americans be taxed to provide more funds for the UN to give away. Considering that Norway taxes it citizens at a level that would cause a revolution in America, I think we can ignore his comments as those of dedicated UN socialists without a pot to piss in, so they try to piss in ours. We are viewed as under-taxed by nations who are taxed to death... Misery demands company.
In light of the 21 billion dollar oil for food scandal managed by the UN, and in light of the probability that Iraq bought Security Council votes with massive bribes from oil smuggling, how can anyone tolerate this corrupt, anti-liberty, anti-American collection of worthless human refuse any longer?
I read that the UN owes Consolidated Edison (the power company that supplies power to the UN headquarters) 16 million dollars in unpaid power bills.
You know what, turn off their power, just like they would any other habitually delinquent rate payer, and send the whole lot home. At the very least, the U.S. should reduce their support (we Americans pay the bulk of the operating costs of the UN) to a level on par equal to our vote. This organization has outlived its usefulness. Even the hopeless League of Nations had greater credibility.
My regards,
Widewing
-
On the UN's list of 25 leading nations in humanitarian aid, it seems that Norway is on top because it gives 0.9% of its nominal GNP as foreign aid. The UN claims that the U.S. only gives .019% of its GNP as aid
Yes but you must look at the total GNP of both countries.
no offense Norway but your GNP aint squat compaired to Americas.
So there 0.9% agaist our .019% is a miss leading number unless you factor inn the totals.
In otherwords USA .019% = alot more $ than Norways 0.9%
-
So what did those nations give to the Florida relief fund ?
-
This thread has just turned into one big pissing contest. Here we are, thousands dead, thousands missing and we're talking about money. I'm somewhat ashamed that we can start being defensive about money and give some thought to the ones that need it.
I'm sure all countries have given as much as they can afford to (although I'm personally disappointed with my countries contribution considering they'd happily spend more on wars). Jan Egeland was wrong to critisize contributions since every single penny helps towards the relief fund. Those that haven't given as much money are sending aircraft, ships and rescue teams.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I'm curious as to what makes the "top 50 for worst" if this doesn't?
I read in the paper today that, in terms of deaths, it was in the top 5 disasters of modern times;
1. 1931 - China - Yangtze River floods kill 3.7M.
2. 1970 - Bangladesh - Tidal wave kills 200,000.
3. 1975 - China - 200,000 dead again in Yangtze River floods.
4. 1971 - North Vietnam - Red River Delta floods, killing 100,000.
5. 2004 - Asian Earthquake and tsunamis - 60,000+ dead
-
Point of the matter is that the average Norwegian citizen gives more than the average American. Every American gives 0.019% of their wealth, Norwegians give 0.2%. Norway gives about 10% total of what the US gives, and no offense to the US, but if a tiny country like Norway pays 10% total of what the mighty USA does ... it says a lot about the USA.
Yeah,
We are not taxed to death and your good at manipulating statistics to support your anti American agenda.
I am sure the victims will be comforted by the fact Norway's tiny contribution to the relief effort cost their citizens a fraction of a percentage more out of their taxes than the United States much larger monetary contribution. Not to mention the fleet of C130's loaded with aid that is already over there. Not to mention the private donations, relief organizations, and massive logistical support the USA is providing.
Your insignificant fraction of percentage may give you some cause to feel good for completely selfish reasons. It does not do much for the victims or their families.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Yeah,
We are not taxed to death and your good at manipulating statistics to support your anti American agenda.
I am sure the victims will be comforted by the fact Norway's tiny contribution to the relief effort cost their citizens a fraction of a percentage more out of their taxes than the United States much larger monetary contribution. Not to mention the fleet of C130's loaded with aid that is already over there. Not to mention the private donations, relief organizations, and massive logistical support the USA is providing.
Your insignificant fraction of percentage may give you some cause to feel good for completely selfish reasons. It does not do much for the victims or their families.
Crumpp
what about to post some links instead of pan oneself on the back and let other to judge ?
-
Originally posted by Widewing
97 million??? I believe that it was 30 million.
Egeland (a Norwegian) was full of baloney and he knew it because he spent all day today back-tracking.
Simple facts:
Only a small percentage of U.S. aid is counted by the UN. They exclude food aid, of which the U.S. regularly gives 2.5 times the total (measured in dollar value) provided by the rest of the entire planet. The UN also discounts private contributions to relief organizations and charities, which totals more than that given by the U.S. government in terms of dollars.
On the UN's list of 25 leading nations in humanitarian aid, it seems that Norway is on top because it gives 0.9% of its nominal GNP as foreign aid. The UN claims that the U.S. only gives 0.19% of its GNP as aid. However, when you factor in food aid and private contributions the U.S. rises to the top by a significant margin (3.2%). Egeland had the audacity to suggest that Americans be taxed to provide more funds for the UN to give away. Considering that Norway taxes it citizens at a level that would cause a revolution in America, I think we can ignore his comments as those of dedicated UN socialists without a pot to piss in, so they try to piss in ours. We are viewed as under-taxed by nations who are taxed to death... Misery demands company.
In light of the 21 billion dollar oil for food scandal managed by the UN, and in light of the probability that Iraq bought Security Council votes with massive bribes from oil smuggling, how can anyone tolerate this corrupt, anti-liberty, anti-American collection of worthless human refuse any longer?
I read that the UN owes Consolidated Edison (the power company that supplies power to the UN headquarters) 16 million dollars in unpaid power bills.
You know what, turn off their power, just like they would any other habitually delinquent rate payer, and send the whole lot home. At the very least, the U.S. should reduce their support (we Americans pay the bulk of the operating costs of the UN) to a level on par equal to our vote. This organization has outlived its usefulness. Even the hopeless League of Nations had greater credibility.
My regards,
Widewing
Perfect.
-
I take back what I said about my government. They've increased their £1 million to £15 million ($29,000,000). Perhaps they do have a conscious afterall.
UK based charities have so far raised £3 million.
-
thanks wiedewing..
there has allways been an anti UN movement here.. the reasons are simple. Americans don't even want their own government telling em what to do... they certainly don't want a band of effite liberals with a chip on their shoulder against us having any say.... we don't want incompetent UN military leaders leading our troops and...
we have allways been the most generous of countries in the world... we don't need this jan ahole telling us what we should give. I didn't see the UN pouring money at Florida during its last disaster... I don't see the UN doing anything to help iraq... they allowed a sadistic madman to stay in power and kill more people a year than this entire disaster while using the opportunity to line their pockets with billions of dollars at the expense of the people who were being tortured and killed in iraq.
I spit on this norwegian jan ahole and the UN.
lazs
-
What Replicant said.
Every help is a good help, no matter how much money spent!
but since some here compare, comparing the aid to what is spent for
new weapons alone, it is laughable, sad but true.
R
Gh0stFT
-
Originally posted by Widewing
97 million??? I believe that it was 30 million.
Egeland (a Norwegian) was full of baloney and he knew it because he spent all day today back-tracking.
Simple facts:
Only a small percentage of U.S. aid is counted by the UN. They exclude food aid, of which the U.S. regularly gives 2.5 times the total (measured in dollar value) provided by the rest of the entire planet. The UN also discounts private contributions to relief organizations and charities, which totals more than that given by the U.S. government in terms of dollars.
On the UN's list of 25 leading nations in humanitarian aid, it seems that Norway is on top because it gives 0.9% of its nominal GNP as foreign aid. The UN claims that the U.S. only gives 0.19% of its GNP as aid. However, when you factor in food aid and private contributions the U.S. rises to the top by a significant margin (3.2%). Egeland had the audacity to suggest that Americans be taxed to provide more funds for the UN to give away. Considering that Norway taxes it citizens at a level that would cause a revolution in America, I think we can ignore his comments as those of dedicated UN socialists without a pot to piss in, so they try to piss in ours. We are viewed as under-taxed by nations who are taxed to death... Misery demands company.
In light of the 21 billion dollar oil for food scandal managed by the UN, and in light of the probability that Iraq bought Security Council votes with massive bribes from oil smuggling, how can anyone tolerate this corrupt, anti-liberty, anti-American collection of worthless human refuse any longer?
I read that the UN owes Consolidated Edison (the power company that supplies power to the UN headquarters) 16 million dollars in unpaid power bills.
You know what, turn off their power, just like they would any other habitually delinquent rate payer, and send the whole lot home. At the very least, the U.S. should reduce their support (we Americans pay the bulk of the operating costs of the UN) to a level on par equal to our vote. This organization has outlived its usefulness. Even the hopeless League of Nations had greater credibility.
My regards,
Widewing
Americans know we are fortunate to live in a great country and don't have a problem sending aid. When have we NOT?
We DO have a problem with being criticized for not doing enough by countries and organizations that will do even less in this emergency and nothing at all when we have problems of our own.
Unfortunately, I believe that most americans know in thier hearts that the rest of the world will not be there for us in our time of need. They will just expect us to take care of it as they expect us to take care of them.
You're right on the money Widewing
-
Originally posted by GScholz
10% of your contribution is an insignificant fraction? Then I guess the whole ammount can't be much either. For every $100 you 280 million Americans give, we 4.5 million Norwegians give $10.
If Egeland got you Scrooges to open up your fat wallets a little more, then he did a good job.
If anything he created a larger animosity for the U.N. by the american people. You don't ask for money by insulting the historically largest contributors.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That might be the future since people tend to get PO'ed by comments like this from ignorant American ass-holes like you.
Why am I an Ass-Hole? Explain it.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That might be the future since people tend to get PO'ed by comments like this from ignorant American ass-holes like you.
Also, people can get PO'ed by those comments, but calling huge aid givers "stingy" as A-O-K?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
You need an explanation?
You're an adult (assuming) and you said it..... explain it.
Originally posted by GScholz
The world will be there if and when you need help. The world do not expect you to take care of them ... Are you as deluded that you actually believe that the USA is taking care of the whole shrecking world?!
Your boy Jan seems to think we have a large responsiblity too....... but to answer your question... I believe that the U.S. has been such a large contibuter of aid in the past, that it has become thought of as required and that DOES get a little annoying. IMHO.
This situation is horrible and of course everyone wants to help... but to have the U.N. shove the collection hat up anyone asss is rediculous.
Originally posted by GScholz If and when you do need help from others, you will get it ... unless we are so fed up with your constant ignorant whining and arrogance that we'll just watch and laugh instead. Who knows?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
10% of your contribution is an insignificant fraction? Then I guess the whole ammount can't be much either. For every $100 you 280 million Americans give, we 4.5 million Norwegians give $10.
If Egeland got you Scrooges to open up your fat wallets a little more, then he did a good job.
Hate to break it to ya, but the majority of us don't have fat wallets. Most people I know are happy to keep their bills paid & food on the table.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
He shouldn't need to ask for it. Do you think you'll get gratitude from people that have to beg for your table scraps?
Who said he HAD to ask for it??
Why do you think that the U.S. WASN't going to help???
Are you actually thinking before you say nthese things or are you just throwing out the first thing that comes to your mind to say?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Btw. Crumpp, calling me "anti-American" does not hurt me anymore. In fact every time guys like you post here you make it that much more true.
More spiteful insults....... pattern forming here.....
-
Anybody know the total percentage of all government humanitarian aid the United States gave out to the world last year?
According to CNN:
Forty Percent of the WORLDS total humanitarian aid budget is provided by the United States. Less than ten percent of the world's population funds 40 percent of the bill.
As for the "insult". It was not. It was simply the truth. Name a post by you that supports anything the US does. In your eyes we can do no right.
Your cries of "foul play" have the credability of a Black Panther or KKK member claiming they are insulted because someone called them racist.
Crumpp
-
The guy that said the US is stingy is an idiot. Same kind of idiot that still thinks that the US is doing Iraq a favour by killing 100 000 of them trying to save them.
He would fit in well here.
-
This capitilization of tragedy for the purpose of international face is so typically human.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
The western world could do so much more Muckmaw, and you "forgot" to mention in your headline that he didnt slam only the U.S. but the wester world in general.
Yeah?
How many others are listed by name?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The USA offered $15 million, Egeland whined, USA gave more.
"The rich shrecker looked down on the hapless man and said 'so ... your home and everything you own was washed out to sea? Ok, tell you what; if you say pretty please with sugar on top, I'll give you a quarter'. The other people on the street looked upon the rich shrecker with disgust and each gave the man a dollar. Not wanting to be outdone by the little people the rich shrecker forks up ten dollar bills and throws them at the pleading man's feet. The rich shrecker quickly walks away mumbling 'ungrateful bastards'."
So, are you saying that the U.S. was only planning on giving 15mill... Period... and the only reason we offered more was because we were called "stingy"?
Where do you get your "enlightened" information from? I guess I must be an ignorant american ass-hole, since I didn't know this.
-
The U.S. will end up giving aid that will cost billions.That people are so quick to criticise a country that gives more aid than any other country,or combination of countries speaks volumes.
Powell quote,"The United States has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations
in the world," Powell said when asked about the comments Monday by Jan Egeland, the U.N. humanitarian aid chief."
-
Look at that. GSholz is making even more friends.
-
Originally posted by Lizking
A pity that those wishing to give aid are so often bashed for their support.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm
Also, while a terrible tragedy, this doesn't make the top 50 for worst, my friend.
But it will most likely be the greatest natural disaster we will witness in our lifetime. And on a scale of area effected and damage it probably is the worlds greatest natural disaster.
....-Gixer
-
Originally posted by ET
So what did those nations give to the Florida relief fund ?
You expect some of the least wealthy nations on earth to be able to donate money to Florida and the US the wealthiest nation on earth when they get hit by a few hurricanes? I'm sure if they east coast of the US had been hit by a 30 meter Tsunami that there would be the same level of aid and donations from the same countries that are assisting SE asia. Or would you be expecting a cheque from the Andaman or Nicobar islands?
Don't forget that when the US had all those horendus forrest fires a couple of summers ago that countries did assist. Maybe not finanically but with what was criticle at the time expertise in fighting fires and fire equipment. I know Australia and New Zealand sent Fire Crews,equipment and most important of all experts in figthing bush fires.
So try and leave your "boo hoo f*** the world they never help us" immaturity at the door.
....-Gixer
-
I think a lot of you are missing the point... there is plenty of misery to go around... people are dying od all sorts of things... people are underfed and living in horrible conditions... there is tyranny...
Point is... the UN and this jan ahole do absolutely nothing that I can see in any effective way to relieve any of this misery... they are not the least bit cost effective and have proven to be little more than criminals ...
further... the U.S. is the biggest contributer to all forms of aid combined... as stated... 10% of the population gives over 40% of the worlds aid. we do it voluntarily... I find the UN extremely offensive.... everything about their hypocritical, self ritghtious and criminal organization stinks to high heaven.
and... they should pay their frigging bills the liberal little deadbeats.
since norway is such a good friend to the UN I think we ought to move the building to ice bear country.
lazs
-
Sure they can raise my taxes, of course that would mean I would have to cut my contibution to a summer camp for little kids with AIDS.
OOPS sorry that was a domestic thing I guess helping out at home does not count in the wide world.
I do not require a thank you or even credit for what the U.S. does that is positve, just please do not spit in our eye when we do it.
BTW campheartland is where my money goes, look it up on the net.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That might be the future since people tend to get PO'ed by comments like this from ignorant American ass-holes like you.
Do you really believe the crap that spews from your mouth?
I cant believe that you could possibly be this big of a moron.
But who knows i might be wrong.
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
According to CNN:
Forty Percent of the WORLDS total humanitarian aid budget is provided by the United States. Less than ten percent of the world's population funds 40 percent of the bill.
Crumpp
Knew it was a lot, didn't know it was that much.
-
Quick bring water Gsholtz Brain is on fire
http://aqvist.bmc.uu.se/dombo/videos/burningfart.mov
-
Wasn't Scholz the guy recently posting that the US was flat broke, our dollar is in a terminal spiral and we're about to implode economically?
But now were the "rich shreckers"?
I thought the people living in countries that have switched to the Euro were the new world power? I thought THEY were the rich guys now.
It's all so confusing.
:rofl
-
eagl.money | mouth
http://www.redcross.org international response fund.
Every little counts.
-
Why did anyone have to bring up Norway? You knew their spokesperson would follow soon after.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That might be the future since people tend to get PO'ed by comments like this from ignorant American ass-holes like you.
You sir..made it to the top of my personal list of Jerks on this BBS.:aok
-
Knew it was a lot, didn't know it was that much.
Yep. Kind of pisses you off doesn't it when you hear other countries whining.
Frankly the United States is one of the most generous nations on this planet. We lay our personal lives at risk and lend our financial support to build others safety, security, and happiness all over the world. We definately go over and above to advance the cause the freedom.
There will always be small minded selfish individuals who will complain it's not enough.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Jan Egeland? nope... he stays right were he is.
I think we hit a nerve, here;)
-
Some of American journalist are bigger idiots that you could imagine.
Actualy we had same problems as well few years ago, because journalist did hear something from someone, then he explained it for him self and he released material full of his trough... And same things ahppen regarding "stigny help from american"
On Tuesday, Egeland said his comments had been misunderstood. "I have been misinterpreted when I yesterday said that my belief that rich countries in general can be more generous."
und some too sensitive nationalist translated it to slaping america .... ohh well
link
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/12/29/bush.quake/index.html
its so funny how many people do not check quality and objectivity of information, whitch they get.
But it were funny bashing overhere :D
and this is that famous "slaping eemerica" comment
"If, actually, the foreign assistance of many countries now is 0.1 or 0.2 percent of the gross national income, I think that is stingy, really,"
-
Originally posted by Gixer
You expect some of the least wealthy nations on earth to be able to donate money to Florida and the US the wealthiest nation on earth when they get hit by a few hurricanes? I'm sure if they east coast of the US had been hit by a 30 meter Tsunami that there would be the same level of aid and donations from the same countries that are assisting SE asia. Or would you be expecting a cheque from the Andaman or Nicobar islands?
Don't forget that when the US had all those horendus forrest fires a couple of summers ago that countries did assist. Maybe not finanically but with what was criticle at the time expertise in fighting fires and fire equipment. I know Australia and New Zealand sent Fire Crews,equipment and most important of all experts in figthing bush fires.
So try and leave your "boo hoo f*** the world they never help us" immaturity at the door.
....-Gixer
Let me see, India has a nuke program, but didn't give a flying f**k about developing a civil defence or tidal wave warning system.... hmmmmm....
-
The British Public's donation so far is £20m and rising, + the £15m so far from the government that adds up to about $70m. That works out to over a dollar per citizen, no idea how this compares to other countries.
-
yep... ol sclotzie tells me that I am in danger of standing in soup lines and begging for money from productive socialist countries like norway any second now.... in fact... it is nothing but his generosity that allows me to have any standard of living whatsover and then... a few posts latter he claims that me and all us Americans are wealthy as midas and need to give away even more of the money we are borrowing from him and other hard working socialists...
lada.. missunderstand? why would anyone say the word America in a speech about how western countries aren't giving enough and not the word france or whatever instead?
lazs
-
Spain alone is sending $68M. Last news indicated about $30M from USA. I would expect much much more.
-
Just a reminder:
The U.S.'s current national debt is $7.4 trillion dollars, and we are spending $450-500 billion more per year than our national income. Within 20 years the current social security system to pay old age/retirement benefits will go broke.
I don't consider us a very wealthy nation. Perhaps 1-2% of our population is fantastically wealthy, but a significant percent of our children are growing up in poverty (I think its something like 1 in 5).
The leader of our most famous relief organization, the American Red Cross, earns a base salary in excess of $600,000 (making her part of the 1-2% fantastically wealthy. The former CEO was fired and received a $1.5 million dollar severance package).
-
Originally posted by MANDO
Spain alone is sending $68M. Last news indicated about $30M from USA. I would expect much much more.
The US government spent 24 billion last year alone on aid to the world.
-
seems our money would be better spent on saving ouselves so that we don't burden the socialist countries with our immenent downfall.
lazs
-
laz, I was thinking something similar.
Maybe we could stop spending those billions on the rest of the world and instead provide "free" healthcare and welfare for all Americans.
If we did that, we should be considered the cat's arse by European standards.
-
Originally posted by Furball
The British Public's donation so far is £20m and rising, + the £15m so far from the government that adds up to about $70m. That works out to over a dollar per citizen, no idea how this compares to other countries.
EU $44m
US: $35m
Canada: $33m
Japan: $30m
UK: $28.9m
Australia: $27m
France: $20.4m
Denmark: $15.6m
Saudi Arabia: $10m
Norway: $6.6m
Taiwan: $5.1m
Finland: $3.4m
Kuwait: $2.1m
Netherlands: $2.6m
UAE: $2m
Ireland $1.3m
Singapore: $1.2m
Source: Reuters, United Nations
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Yep. Kind of pisses you off doesn't it when you hear other countries whining.
Frankly the United States is one of the most generous nations on this planet. We lay our personal lives at risk and lend our financial support to build others safety, security, and happiness all over the world. We definately go over and above to advance the cause the freedom.
There will always be small minded selfish individuals who will complain it's not enough.
Crumpp
Odd that you're loathed all over the planet - what with being so generous and everything - wonder why that is....
-
Originally posted by GScholz
.....got you Scrooges to open up your fat wallets a little more, .
Vote in some leaders to reduce your taxes and you to can have a fat wallet, don't blame me for livening in a country that cares about it's people, jealous. The US and its citizens are the most generous in the world. I dare you to prove otherwise.
-
Amazing figures.
If you add up the non-Musilm country's donations, then add up the Musilm country's you get this:
Non Musilm = 214.8M
Musilm (generously included Taiwan) = 20.4M
My my my.
-
Originally posted by Curval
Amazing figures.
If you add up the non-Musilm country's donations, then add up the Musilm country's you get this:
Non Musilm = 214.8M
Musilm (generously included Taiwan) = 20.4M
My my my.
I was thinking the same, not that it surprises me.
-
shadenm... if we are indeed loathed all over the planet as you seem to believe.... why don't you tell us why that is?
lazs
-
But then again, we don't need a disaster to contribute.
Total U.S. Contributions to the UN System,
Both Assessed and Voluntary -
Estimated at $3.0 Billion
Humanitarian/Human Rights - 39%
Environment - 2%
Development - 8%
Weapons of Mass Destruction - 3%
UN Regular Budget - 9%
UN Peacekeeping - 31%
Open Markets - 4%
Health - 4%
*Figures are based on FY 2002, excluding U.S. arrears payment.
Percentages reflect how U.S. dollars are divided within the UN system.
51.4% of the World Food Program budget to help feed 72 million people in 82 countries.*
17.1% of the United Nations Children’s Fund budget to feed, vaccinate, educate and protect children in 162 countries.*
14.1% of the United Nations Development Program core budget to eradicate poverty and encourage democratic governance.*
25.8% of the International Atomic Energy Agency budget to ensure safe and peaceful application of nuclear energy and prevent the illicit use of nuclear material for weapons.**
22% of the World Health Organization core budget as well as significant voluntary resources, helping to prevent and control epidemics and to improve standards of health.**
25% of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees budget to help protect refugees and facilitate their return home or re-settlement in another country.*
25% of the International Civil Aviation Organization budget to ensure safe, efficient and economical air travel.**
* These programs operate strictly on voluntary contributions.
** These programs operate on a combination of assessed and voluntary contributions.
-
Originally posted by Curval
Amazing figures.
If you add up the non-Musilm country's donations, then add up the Musilm country's you get this:
Non Musilm = 214.8M
Musilm (generously included Taiwan) = 20.4M
My my my.
Plus that part of the worls is largely muslim.
Just goes to show that the world is NOT anti Muslim but indeed anti terrorist.
-
EU $44m
How many countries in the EU?
Odd that you're loathed all over the planet - what with being so generous and everything - wonder why that is....
Several Reasons IMO:
1. Because we are so generous. People now expect it. If you get into trouble don't worry the United States will bail you out.
2. We are the most powerful nation on the planet. Many People are like crabs. You can put two crabs in a shallow bucket and have no fear they will escape. One will always pull the other back in. People all over the world want our wealth and gadgets but not us.
3. American cultural arrogance. We tend to think everyone is just like us or we can show them a better way.
4. We become all things to all people in these disaster areas especially in the uneducated third world. They are mad and disappointed when their lives are not miraculously transformed into a mirror image of the average American.
Crumpp
-
120000 dead so far.
Stop arguing and write som checks instead, and those who wont pay, should shut up and let the others give their share without beeing harrased.
Frankly I dont give a damn about how much or how little people/countries are giving, the most important is too help out the best we can.
-
Airguard,
I wasn't aware this BBS discussion was holding up or delaying the relief process.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by airguard
120000 dead so far.
Stop arguing and write som checks instead, and those who wont pay, should shut up and let the others give their share without beeing harrased.
Frankly I dont give a damn about how much or how little people/countries are giving, the most important is too help out the best we can.
Well said just gave to christian childrens fund
http://www.christianchildrensfund.org/
-
Originally posted by Schaden
EU $44m
US: $35m
Canada: $33m
Japan: $30m
UK: $28.9m
Australia: $27m
France: $20.4m
Denmark: $15.6m
Saudi Arabia: $10m
Norway: $6.6m
Taiwan: $5.1m
Finland: $3.4m
Kuwait: $2.1m
Netherlands: $2.6m
UAE: $2m
Ireland $1.3m
Singapore: $1.2m
Source: Reuters, United Nations
That's over a dollar per Canadian.
-
Originally posted by Torque
That's over a dollar per Canadian.
WTG Canada!
-
Originally posted by airguard
120000 dead so far.
Stop arguing and write som checks instead, and those who wont pay, should shut up and let the others give their share without beeing harrased.
Frankly I dont give a damn about how much or how little people/countries are giving, the most important is too help out the best we can.
If you STFU about how you contributed, I still won't give a dime. Deal?
-
I ask that some people give to the.....xxxx insert name here.....
Come on folks lighten up.......
Help out if you are able.....if not, then do your best to keep your home situation well and then keep the indviduals and families that have been devastated in your thoughts (and prayers if you so desire or belive in that)
Regards
-
It always amazes me these peeing contest over which country does what and how much relief money is needed, hey how about some of these corporations that make more than third world countries donating there share, hmm cheap labor they use over there for products sold here, Hmm i bet Microsoft could shuck out 50 mil or BMW or Michelin, hey how bout BP or Exxon even, heck even old Donald can go yer fired and send a few million this is global yall and the effect are just starting and will continue in a world economy, maybe ask yoursleves how much is My company helping out.
-
Not to be an prettythang hat but wern't they just blowing up Americans, Australians, and Europeans just a few months ago, (Bali) And now they whine about the help they are getting and how fast?. :rolleyes:
-
I follow 2 other message boards on a regular basis one another flightsim related community and the third on helicopters. Both are busy organising to raise money for the red cross. This community with it's largest thread on the subject which is probably the worst natural disaster in modern history on scale and of those now homeless and in need of help.
Yet it turns into a slagging match of who is doing what, and once again the US having to defend it's actions on the international stage. I always rated this community pretty poor on most subjects of any real importance but this one really takes the cake.
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by krazyhorse
It always amazes me these peeing contest over which country does what and how much relief money is needed, hey how about some of these corporations that make more than third world countries donating there share, hmm cheap labor they use over there for products sold here, Hmm i bet Microsoft could shuck out 50 mil or BMW or Michelin, hey how bout BP or Exxon even, heck even old Donald can go yer fired and send a few million this is global yall and the effect are just starting and will continue in a world economy, maybe ask yoursleves how much is My company helping out.
Private companies joined the act. Many in Europe and the United States have said they will match contributions by employees. Others have donated cash outright.
The American drugmaker Pfizer Inc. has pledged $10 million in cash and $25 million in medical supplies; Johnson & Johnson $2 million plus supplies; and finance group J.P. Morgan Chase up to $3 million, including matched employee contributions.
The British telecoms firm Vodafone pledged nearly $2 million, the Dutch financial services group ING pledged $1 million and the German utility firm E.ON donated $1.4 million.
-
Originally posted by Gixer
and once again the US having to defend it's actions on the international stage.
...-Gixer
I belive you hit the nail on the head!
-
Originally posted by Gixer
I always rated this community pretty poor on most subjects of any real importance but this one really takes the cake.
...-Gixer
Take a look in the mirror Gixer ;)
Like it or not, you are part of this community, in fact you would be one of the prime instigators of some of the negative reactions/followups around here.
If you have issues with this community, then you need to take a long look at your on posts, actions, and input.
-
If Egeland got you Scrooges to open up your fat wallets a little more, then he did a good job.
Fat wallets? Hehe you are so misinformed GS its unreal. Very few Americans have truly *fat wallets*. The vast majority of us live from payday to payday struggling to pay the utility bills, mortgages/rent, buying food, paying for our kids clothes etc etc.
Not long ago you were ranting about how America's economic collapse was imminent, how bad off we were. Now you completely reverse your position and accuse us of being stingy rich people.
I dont have much, but I will bet it ALL that America will end up giving BILLIONS long after you and the rest of Norway have forgotten about the terrible tsunamis in southeast Asia.
To all of you turning this thread into a pissing contest over who is giving the most.....you disgust me. In fact, you disgust me even more than professional athletes (who make more for playing ONE game than my wife and I do in an entire year) going on strike for more money and benefits.
I spoke to my wife on the phone just a bit ago, we agreed to give something (how much we can swing remains to be seen), we also agreed that most likely clothes for the kids will wait a few weeks so we can do this. (again, it remains to be seen, something else might *wait*)
-
Originally posted by Elfie
Fat wallets? Hehe you are so misinformed GS its unreal. Very few Americans have truly *fat wallets*. The vast majority of us live from payday to payday struggling to pay the utility bills, mortgages/rent, buying food, paying for our kids clothes etc etc.
Not long ago you were ranting about how America's economic collapse was imminent, how bad off we were. Now you completely reverse your position and accuse us of being stingy rich people.
I dont have much, but I will bet it ALL that America will end up giving BILLIONS long after you and the rest of Norway have forgotten about the terrible tsunamis in southeast Asia.
To all of you turning this thread into a pissing contest over who is giving the most.....you disgust me. In fact, you disgust me even more than professional athletes (who make more for playing ONE game than my wife and I do in an entire year) going on strike for more money and benefits.
I spoke to my wife on the phone just a bit ago, we agreed to give something (how much we can swing remains to be seen), we also agreed that most likely clothes for the kids will wait a few weeks so we can do this. (again, it remains to be seen, something else might *wait*)
If you actually think he is informed on what he is talking about .... you are more delusional than he is.......
-
I would feel really guilty giving any m,oney away since sclotzie has told me that it is only our debt to norway and other enlightened countries that allows us to have any standard of living at all... If I gave any money it would be like taking food out of the mouth of sclotzies children..
If you send anything to the red cross you better have the sense to go with it to keep it out of the pockets of the "adminestrators" by the time it gets to anyone who needs it it will be nothing more than a soggy cardboard cup of lukewarm coffee or some WWII surpluss cots.
you guys should look into the red cross before getting all knee jerk. Send money to the salvation army or some other less scam organization.
lazs
-
Laz,
I challenge your assertion that the American Red Cross does not efficiently spend the charitable donations it receives. The new CEO, Marsha Johnson Evans, earns a base salary of only $621,435 (not including benefits or deferred compensation). That is far less than the outgoing CEO, who earned $450,000 annually but received a $1.5 million severance package.
People need to know their donations are doing what the intend for it, and your bad mouthing of the American Red Cross may keep money out of the pockets of those who depend on it!
-
Originally posted by oboe
Laz,
The new CEO, Marsha Johnson Evans, earns a base salary of only $621,435 (not including benefits or deferred compensation).
How can she survive on that pay?
-
well... I certainly wouldn't like to be responsible for taking money out of the pockets of marsha evans or her huge staff.
lazs
-
I'd just like to make a few points to put this string into some proper context.
Before beginning, however, I would just say that I'm sure everyone joins me in feeling a terrible sadness for all those whose lives have been lost and also in a feeling of utter powerlessness in the face of such a cataclysmic event. I wish there was something tangible I could do, other than donating a few pounds to a relief fund.
My heart also goes out to all those who have survived the event, or were safely away from it, but who know or are uncertain of the fate of friends and/or family who may have been involved.
I don't think so, but it may be that I have two friends in that area. I know they were headed to Vietnam before Christmas, but I fear their plans may have included going on to Thailand. I certainly hope that they did not do that.
This extract is from the BBC News online service today and I feel it puts Jan Egeland's point into the proper light. He was clearly making that statement in relation to aid fund donations in general, and most certainly not those funds donated by States specifically in response to this disaster.
The full text of the report can be found at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4130127.stm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
World helps - but will it forget?
'Stingy' rich
The second stage is for medium and long term help. The UN is holding a conference next month to discuss the next steps following this disaster. Already the UN's emergency co-coordinator Jan Egeland has said this might be the worst natural disaster ever. That implies the need for unusually large contributions.
He is also complaining that rich countries are not giving enough to the poor anyway.
"It is beyond me why we are so stingy. Really. Christmas time should remind many Western countries at least, how rich we have become," he said.
"There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy."
He suggested that governments "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think what this debate on our forum is bringing up is that States are suddenly finding that the level of funds they pledge to disaster relief is being almost instantly bettered by private individual donations within their own countries. Here in the UK, the Government immediately pledged £15 million in relief. This was very soon dwarfed by the figure raised by public donations.
This taken from BBC News online today:
UK tsunami donations reach £45m
The British public has donated £45m to help the victims of the Asian tsunami, say relief charities.
Up to £1m an hour has been donated and the government has raised its pledge from £15m to £50m, making it one of the largest international donors.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not a religious man, but I pray that the situation does not become worse due to disease among survivors lacking proper sanitation and medical aid.
-
News said the U.S. is now going to give over 300 million in aid.
-
U.S. Boosts Tsunami Aid Tenfold to $350M
DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press
CRAWFORD, Texas - The United States is pledging $350 million to help tsunami victims, a tenfold increase over its first wave of aid, President Bush announced Friday.
"Initial findings of American assessment teams on the ground indicate that the need for financial and other assistance will steadily increase in the days and weeks ahead," Bush said Friday in a statement released in Crawford, Texas, where he is staying at his ranch.
"Our contributions will continue to be revised as the full effects of this terrible tragedy become clearer," he said. "Our thoughts and prayers are with all those affected by this epic disaster."
Bush also is sending Secretary of State Colin Powell to Indian Ocean coastal areas ravaged by earthquake and tsunami to assess what more the United States needs to do. The president's brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, will travel with him.
The newly announced aid came after some critics claimed that the initial U.S. contribution of $35 million was meager considering the vast wealth of the nation.
France has promised $57 million, Britain has pledged $95 million, Sweden is sending $75.5 million and Spain is offering $68 million, although that pledge is partly in loans.
-
well what i have read over..
Schlumpz and Gixer..
both of you are scum...
You post that we are cheap..with out knwoing wtf u are talking about..
tooo funny..now what...You will say we were forced to give HUNDREDS of Millions to the releif..
truly scum.....I hope you have a rotten year
GET OFF OUR JOCKS
Die and go to hell if we didnt meet your instant expectations ...We..sent military over and have now seen how crappy it is over there..we provide when we find the rigth thing to do..which was skip the disgusting UN "admin fees"..i love it..die scum ..die..there are many other humans that deserve bettr then what you have.
again.....USA gives more aid then the rest of you combined ..but you complain..truly maggots
-
U.S. Boosts Tsunami Aid to $350M
Friday, December 31, 2004
WASHINGTON — The United States is pledging $350 million to help tsunami victims, a tenfold increase over its first wave of aid, President Bush announced Friday.
Bush also is sending Secretary of State Colin Powell (search) to areas ravaged by earthquake and tsunami to assess what more the United States needs to do. The president's brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, will travel with him.
The newly announced aid came after some critics claimed that the initial U.S. contribution of $35 million was meager considering the vast wealth of the nation.
France has promised $57 million, Britain has pledged $95 million, Sweden is sending $75.5 million and Spain is offering $68 million, although that pledge is partly in loans. From FOXNEWS
-
Schlumpz and Gixer.. ES&D!
Nice that you sit in yer lil freekin Worlds and critisize the USA, yet your Country has niether the Balls or the Freekin $$$ to make a difference in this World.
Sooo slither back under yer lil wet rocks and when the next catrastphe happens just pray it isn't YOUR Fargin Country begging for $$$$ relief from the USA. We just might fuggin remember.
Wouldn't that be a knot in yer worthless lil panties?
MAC
-
Originally posted by Schaden
Odd that you're loathed all over the planet - what with being so generous and everything - wonder why that is....
Could it be that WE have something that YOU could only dream of? It's called Freedom assswipe.
For a Country a lil over 240 years old I think we have the Fargen Balls to stand up strong and say WTF do you want from us anymore? Ya know it's as if we do too much then the World critisizes us, if we do too little the same dam thing.
I would like to see MY Country, USA , close down all trade, close all borders and watch the Freekin World cry!!!!
(_!_)
Mac
-
Originally posted by AWMac
...I would like to see MY Country, USA , close down all trade, close all borders and watch the Freekin World cry!!!!
Mac
I'd love to see this too, except that we import over half of the oil we use, so alot of the U.S. would be feeling the pain.
-
Originally posted by AWMac
Schlumpz and Gixer.. ES&D!
Nice that you sit in yer lil freekin Worlds and critisize the USA, yet your Country has niether the Balls or the Freekin $$$ to make a difference in this World.
Sooo slither back under yer lil wet rocks and when the next catrastphe happens just pray it isn't YOUR Fargin Country begging for $$$$ relief from the USA. We just might fuggin remember.
Wouldn't that be a knot in yer worthless lil panties?
MAC
LOL
I always like the immature FU posts, suprising how angry people get over just a message board.
If Bush was still running the show when NZ had a disaster it would still take him 3 days or more to even realise there was a disaster and even then respond with little more then a token million or two until someone told him he was being stingy.
...-Gixer
-
By the way what's ES&D? Something that you don't even have the balls to type out but looks like some sort of Quake deathmatch taunt. :lol
...-Gixer
-
eat poo poo & die
-
Originally posted by AWMac
Schlumpz and Gixer.. ES&D!
Nice that you sit in yer lil freekin Worlds and critisize the USA, yet your Country has niether the Balls or the Freekin $$$ to make a difference in this World.
Sooo slither back under yer lil wet rocks and when the next catrastphe happens just pray it isn't YOUR Fargin Country begging for $$$$ relief from the USA. We just might fuggin remember.
Wouldn't that be a knot in yer worthless lil panties?
MAC
Much as I despise Gixers attitude I believe the initial NZ response was $5 million in aid. We have a little over 4 million people. We've also never required relief from the US, although on several occasions NZ has provided relief aid to the US in both donations for disasters and humanitarian aid. We also have active peackeepers all over the world, and active forces in Afghanistan and Iraq (I think Bush recently acknowledged the NZ SAS's efforts in Iraq). Not bad for a small island nation of 4 million, geographically isolated from the rest of the world. NZers just seem to put their head down and do the job necessary, not requiring the limelight to make them feel good, they get that feeling from a job well done.
So Mac, you exhibit the primary trait people like Gixer get so anti-american over - ignorance. And not just subtle ignorance, but ignorance so big you could pin a tail on it and call it an elephant.
I leave to you go remove your gigantic foot from your mouth.
-
Originally posted by GreenCloud
again.....USA gives more aid then the rest of you combined ..but you complain..truly maggots
this statement makes you same idiot in my eyes as they are in your eyes....
-
Originally posted by AWMac
yet your Country has niether the Balls or the Freekin $$$ to make a difference in this World.
First of all they have no reasons to do that.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
*lol* Somebody got mad.
Why is it when these people get mad they behave like eight-year olds arguing over whose daddy is the greatest? :lol
Laila Ali's daddy was the greatest.
(http://images.biafranigeriaworld.com/LailaAndMuhammadAli.jpg)
-
why would NZ need aid from anyone in a disaster? millions? I thought that they were a socialist paradise?
vulcan... what aid did NZ give the US during a disaster? Not saying they didn't but... Why would they? we certainly don't need 5 million during a disaster. seems kinda strange is all. What disasters have we ignored that have devestated your island? the great sheep moult of '67?
lazs
-
Originally posted by GreenCloud
.....USA gives more aid then the rest of you combined ..but you complain..truly maggots
Not according to new York Times. the 30th of dec,2004
"Mr Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell have given indignant reactions to a comment by UN chief disaster relief coordinator Jan Egeland that rich nations have been "stingy" in giving aid to poorer nations. "We beg to differ," said the New York Times. "Mr Egeland was right on target."
"We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to ameliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute 15 million dollars."
"That's less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities." The administration has since increased its aid to 35 million dollars. But the Times said the 35 million dollars remains "a miserly drop in the bucket".
"The disparity in development aid given by the United States and the European Union: Last year, the US government gave 16.2 billion dollars, while the EU gave 37.1 billion dollars. It said that in 2002, the figure was 29.9 billion dollars for Europe and 13.2 billion dollars for the United States."
And the 350 millions someone is jibbering about is actully 35 million. One "zero" to much.
Stop throwing **** around.......
It is not a competition. And if it was, you guy would loose big time, so dont even start pulling out figures.
Crabofix
Bork
-
sorry patrone but you are wrong... you are talking about one disaster... one high profile charity endeaver where everyone is breaking their neck to look compassionate... We were talking about overall day to day year in year out charitable contributions where the U.S. gives 40% of all the worlds aid.... they are just not so high profile as this and..... it is 350 million not 35
lazs
-
while the EU gave 37.1 billion dollars.
How many Countries in the EU???
Last year, the US government gave 16.2 billion dollars
How many countries in the United States??
35 Million??
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4138763.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/31/us.aid/index.html
It is not a competition. And if it was, you guy would loose big time, so dont even start pulling out figures.
When some Eurotard in the UN began whining that America is stingy, we should NOT point out the truth?
This thread has NOTHING to do with personal contributions. It is about the fact the US was WRONGLY accused.
I suggest you close your cake hole in the absence of facts. However, the part of me that seeks amusement says, "Please feel free to continue to let those gums bump together and produce these figures!"
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by lazs2
lada.. missunderstand? why would anyone say the word America in a speech about how western countries aren't giving enough and not the word france or whatever instead?
lazs
well he did say most ritch countrieS
just look at that quote... and american people/goerment are the only one who scream that US is not "guilty" ...
thats realy mystery for me, why nobody else took it so personaly, acording to what he said.
-
he never said America or the United States?
lazs
-
you're kidding, per-capita the Euros are more generous?
Can't be...
-
Originally posted by GreenCloud
Schlumpz and Gixer..
both of you are scum...
You post that we are cheap..with out knwoing wtf u are talking about..
truly scum.....I hope you have a rotten year
GET OFF OUR JOCKS
Die and go to hell if we didnt meet your instant expectations ...We..sent military over and have now seen how crappy it is over there..we provide when we find the rigth thing to do..which was skip the disgusting UN "admin fees"..i love it..die scum ..die..there are many other humans that deserve bettr then what you have.
:rofl i love the MAWs on these boards
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
How many Countries in the EU???
25 but I guess at the time the stat were done it was only 15.
How many countries in the United States??
[/B]
0 (what else do you expected from an Eurotrash like me ? :D)
Btw why do you have "Hohun (Henning)" in your signature ?
It's a bit misleading.
-
Correct, he did not. Chalk one up for that sensationalist media of yours.
AFAIK, That is what he claimed AFTER the heat came down on him. Apparently when his job was on the line he "clarified" his statement to mean all "Western" nations. Which is even more silly since the vast majority of humanitarian aid given out in the world comes from Western Nations.
In a few words he moved from a slightly retarded status to full blown village idiot with that statement.
Crumpp
-
didn't he originaly say "the United States and other rich western countries"?
lazs
-
WSJ, Washington Times capitalize on tsunami tragedy.
Joshua Holland (2:48PM) link
===============
"As jaded as I am, it's still surprising to catch an American newspaper--even an ideological rag like the Washington Times--blatantly fabricating a story out of whole cloth.
But that's just what Bill Sammon did in today's edition.
His headline reads: 'U.N. official slams U.S. as 'stingy' [ed. note: Holy smokes! That's the exact title of this thread.] over aid.' But if you think somewhere in the piece there'd be a comment criticizing the U.S. for being, I dunno, 'stingy over aid,' you'd be wrong. Sammon couldn't pull a quote because the 'slam' simply never occured.
Here's the jist of the Times story:
U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
"It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really," the Norwegian-born U.N. official told reporters. "Christmastime should remind many Western countries at least, [of] how rich we have become."
Note how 'stingy' is in quotes in the first graph and 'the United States and other Western nations' is not. That's because Egeland referred to 'wealthy states' and 'donor states,' but at no time did he single out the United States. In fact, when a reporter asked Egeland to name the countries he believed to be "stingy," he pointedly declined to do so (you can stream the 48-minute press conference with RealPlayer and see for yourself).
Sammon finishes his fabrication by quoting White House spokesman Trent Duffy saying that the U.S. leads the world in humanitarian assistance, a statement which Sammon characterizes as a "response to Mr. Egeland's comments."
So how do you get from a Norwegian asking "why are we so stingy?" to a UN official 'slamming' the U.S.? You work for the Washington Times, the leading UN-basher and a publication that's not unduly burdened by those pesky facts. I've written elsewhere about the slant in their broad-brush reporting on the UN's oil-for-food scandal, and this is just more of the same."
============
-
Better slow down a little in this tread.
Its easy to sling stuff around. I am very sure both the countries of UN, EU and USA will give all that is needed to help the victims and to rebuild what is destroyed.
The reason why many countries did´nt give that much to start with was simply because the first reports mentioned something like 1200-1500 dead.
It is very typical Amerikkans to bang their chest and yell about money given. STFU, please.
Lets talk about per capita, if you please, USA is 50 states=50 countries.
Crabofix
bork
-
ok patrone... lets talk about per capita... let's not get all sentimental about this particular charitable act.... let's take em as a whole.... the U.S. with 10% of the worlds population gives 40% of the worlds aid. Hardly stingy.
Raise taxes to give more? that is what rankles... He is telling us how to govern our own country. This to me is proof that the UN is a socialist threat. They damn well better dissarm us (as they wish to do) before they try to take over our tax base and form of government.
I have absolutely no use for the UN or any of it's liberal socialist aholes.
If this squarehead liberal didn't say the U.S. in his "stingy" speech then he is only guilty of pandering for money.... bad enough given the record the UN has for abusing it's powers and lining it's own pockets with phony programs.... any money given directly to the UN and this guy will undoubtably end up being skimmed for personal profit by the corrupt UN officials.
lazs
-
In other words: "Okay he might not be guilty, but he's guilty gawdammit!"
-
I can only agree with you, Laz2.
Un is not the best solution, but right now its the only solution we have. It was constructed to prevent another ww.
USA has choosen to be a part of it. And it is like a marridge, for better or for worth. You might want to get a divorce, but you will not gain anything on it, cause, whether you like it or not, even USA are highly dependent on other countries, both for economy and security.
Still 10% of population paying 40% of the aid?
(I have to admit my math was never good.)
Still if 1/3 is rich and 2/3 are poor on earth, it would give the figures 30% of the "rich", giving like 120% of the aid?
Or would it put 30% giving 13% of the aid?
Please, give me help with theese numbers.
Crabofix
Bork
-
Typical, just like the girl being ceremoniously discharged from an iraqi hospital.
-
crabofix.... I can't hit your target cause it just keeps moving around... you claimed per capita.... I gave you per capita.
now, since that ruined your notion of our stingyness... you want to change it to the "rich" whatever that means... help me with your figures... are you now saying that you want to base it on.... on what? number of rich people? average income? GNP what?
so far as marriage goes... most of us want a divorce.. I do not want the UN to have any control over the U.S.
lazs
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That's great Lazs, I too want the US out of the UN.
why do you want the US out of the UN? Are there any other countries you would like out of the UN?
-
If every single UN member carried an equal share of all operating costs and the same military force, and had exactly the same voice, would that be an ideal UN?
-
Someone left this link on a similar thread, dunno how accurate it is.
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap&int=50
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Yes on a per capita basis.
explain that a little for me. How would that work for military forces?
-
dimwits, argue all you want, but I think the UN guy is the real hero here.
By *****ing all the rich countries out, he got the amount of aid to increase more than tenfold,a nd realy fast!
Engeland, the world owes you a great debt and you probably saved countless lives!
-
Originally posted by GScholz
See, Spit gets it.
Do you know percentage calculus?
so India and China should field the largest forces by far then, right?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well, it's not like they're not doing that right now anyways. However it is important that economic health also plays a factor, so that rich countries carries a greater part of the burden than poor countries. Even if the poor countries may have bigger populations.
maybe countries could contribute troops to UN efforts based on a percentage of the forces they currently field at home.
Then China and India should have the largest UN forces and could be of great help.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
That's almost what I meant. I think there should be a minimum size of military contribution based on population and economic health. How large an army each country has is irrelevant as long as they pledge at least the calculated minimum for UN service. This is incidentally how the UN originally was supposed to work.
I'd say base troop levels on poplulation alone, then use percentage of wealth for each nation as a means to fund them.
That would be most fair.
We would have a HUGE Indian and Chinese troop level and everything would be fair.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
why would NZ need aid from anyone in a disaster? millions? I thought that they were a socialist paradise?
vulcan... what aid did NZ give the US during a disaster? Not saying they didn't but... Why would they? we certainly don't need 5 million during a disaster. seems kinda strange is all. What disasters have we ignored that have devestated your island? the great sheep moult of '67?
lazs
The 5 mill I was refering to was for the Tsunami, last financial aid I believe we gave to the US was for a big batch of hurricanes a few years back when florida was leveled.
More recently we sent fire fighters to help with those big blazes you had (two occasions).
No we haven't required any aid yet, but sitting on a giant faultline with a string of volcanoes up and down our islands you never know ;)
-
why would we need monetary aid from NZ? firefighters? we have plenty of firefighters. Are you saying you sent firefighters on your dime? we didn't pay em? if so... thanks.
sclotzie just wants the U.S. to pay for any corrupt hairbrained scheme the UN cooks up. He has a hard time figuring out the basis for goughing the U.S. but he knows they should pay more than 40% of the worlds relief.
I don't believe that jan ahole got anyone to give any more or less than they would of... he is no hero just a popmpous UN busybody. My take is that if we give any relief that we should avoid letting the UN get it's sticky fingers anywhere near the money.
lazs
-
shouldn't the total amount of relief for all efforts thruought the year be more important than simply the high profile ones that get your country good publicity?
lazs
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I disagree. We would then have a situation where the poor people have to die for the UN while the rich people just pay for it.
well, then go back to the percentage of troops the nation fields at home. If they can afford to have troops at home, then take an equal percentage of each nations standing troop levels and put them to use for the UN.
Think of all the good that many Indian and Chinese troops could do for the UN.
The most fair thing to do would be basing it on an equal percentage of each countries population. That way, an equal percentage of each UN nation would be put in harms way during use of force, rather than having the US unfairly taking most of the finanicial AND military burden.
-
so shlotzie... you don't believe that the US funds the lions share of all worldwide relief? Is it our lieing media that made the UN steal all that oil for food money?
and... I don't want any troops under UN command especially not U.S. troops..
lazs
-
ODA is defined as financial assistance that is concessional in character , has the main objective to promote economic development and welfare of the less developed countries (LDCs), and contains a grant element of at least 25%. The entry does not cover other official flows (OOF) or private flows. Per capita figures expressed per 1 population.
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap&int=50
Nice website but it does not show US official or private donations. In other words it is just great propaganda.
Now let's look at the actual VALUE of what the United States Government officially gives:
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp?so=d2003#oda
Only in ONE year has ONE country given more.
This does NOT include private US organizations.
Lets look at those, down at the bottom under "notes on private donations":
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs
Nonetheless, it is interesting to note for example, per latest estimates, Americans privately give at least $34 billion overseas -- more than three times U.S. official foreign aid of $10 billion:
Notice these numbers are in BILLIONS of US dollars. The benefits of a capitalistic economy and low taxes.
Add these numbers to the unsolicited funds and official funds and the US does provide the majority of western worlds foreign aid.
Crumpp
-
So, Laz2, was it 30% giving 12%, or 10% giving 40% or 30% giving 120%?
Per capita it really does not look good though, I have to say.
Never the less, still you guys give ****loads in total amounts, no doubt.
And speaking about UN and military, I give 3 months (March) until Mr Bush will come crawling on his knees, begging the rest of the world to help solve out the mess he created in Iraq. he will admit that USA made a misstake in this case.
Crabofix
BOOOORK
-
Follow the link. There is a line and block chart.
Crumpp
-
well according to the figures.
EU countries give about 38 billions in aid.
While USA gives 16 billions.
Can that be 40%?
40% out of what the EU countries gives?
Crabofix
BOOOORk
-
Originally posted by NUKE
well, then go back to the percentage of troops the nation fields at home. If they can afford to have troops at home, then take an equal percentage of each nations standing troop levels and put them to use for the UN.
Think of all the good that many Indian and Chinese troops could do for the UN.
The most fair thing to do would be basing it on an equal percentage of each countries population. That way, an equal percentage of each UN nation would be put in harms way during use of force, rather than having the US unfairly taking most of the finanicial AND military burden.
Why only the number of troops ?
The amount of money or the percentage of GNP can give other figures don't you think ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
Why only the number of troops ?
The amount of money or the percentage of GNP can give other figures don't you think ?
look at my other example in the thread.
Base the number of troops as a percentage of a country's population, then fund them with an equal percentage ( GDP) of every country.
Then we would have a fair deal all the way around. In fact, I can't see one flaw in that idea.
That way the poor counties like China and India ( who field huge armies) could contribute forces and die along with the Americans and British in equal percentages based on population when the UN decides to fight.
-
I have to Agree with Nuke on this.
Still he has forgotten that the Iraq "Thing" is´nt a UN mission.
But I think, after March this year, many countries will get involved to stabelize this area, after the failure of Brittish and US troops.
Crabofix
-
Well ...
It's more complex than that.
Introduce the cost of the army in your equation and it will be different.
Using your postulat the army with a lot of soldier should contribute the most even being inferior to a technological and more efficient army having less soldier.
Use a recent example like desert storm I (the 90's one :))
Saddam army should have contributed more to a UN mission than the coalition.
But doesn't have Saddam's army been badly beaten ?
-
All this absurd chest beating while 120,000+ corpses lie rotting and millions are on the verge of starvation.
It's been established that the UN official was criticising all western nations not just America. So the UN bashing on this point is not valid. The guy was attempting to everyone into action. But with the hypersensitivity some Americans have about any criticism of the USA it was used for point scoring by the usual suspects.
Let's get it clear here, the issue is about one of the largest natural disasters ever outside of China. They need aid and they need it now. America like everyone else will contribute their fair share I hope. If everyone in the USA gave $2 that would amount to about 600 million. Many countries have raised the equivalent in relation to their populations including mine. Governments will send more. That how it is.
On the separate issue of aid by the USA to other countries. That is not only humanitarian it's strategic and in the best interests of the United States. It's that simple.
As for the UN the USA won't pull out soon. Why? Because the US has a veto in the security council. Pull out and it's gone. In any case the US uses the UN as it suits. When it doesn't get it's own way it's goes it alone or with it's own allies. Just like everyone else. Really the amount of paranoia about the UN among some people is crazy. Some of you really need to get out more.
-
Straffo.
It all really depends on what task the force is going to fulfill.
Saddam was beaten 1990, yes. but the troops never stayed.
Look at the situation right now, a bigger amount would have been better.
Your little french freedom fried frog:Happy new year!
Crabofix
BOOOORK
-
Im not paranoid of the UN, I just hate the UN and the thieves that run it.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Im not paranoid of the UN, I just hate the UN and the thieves that run it.
Before or after Bush started telling you that?
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Before or after Bush started telling you that?
...-Gixer
I have never had the pleasure to speak with President Bush myself.
Can you name some stellar UN achievments for us Gixer?
-
15.79 billion is not 40% of the total 68.47 billion. It is 23%, and the US is still last on the list compared to GDP. That means that both your government and your population are the cheapest on that list. Perhaps compared "in capita" it looks better?
Now factor in the Private donations and the 23% jumps to 40% plus.
Crumpp
-
Crumpp
I see that the "AID" given to Iraq is in the figures at the link you provided.
It should not be in there, to make a justified "overlook".
Crabofix
-
I see that the "AID" given to Iraq is in the figures at the link you provided.
In your opinion. I think it is fine.
I thought "Net ODA" was the total of government and public contributions. I think this because in percentage of GNP the Norwegian valuse should be about 0.2% not 0.8%.
No "Net ODA" is just official Government Aid. It does not include donations from the private sector or unsolicited government money.
Crumpp
-
Still with all the fanfare per gnp or capita the Euros are more generous. Interesting to see the top three recipients of American ODA are Eqypt, Russia and Israel.
-
Still with all the fanfare per gnp or capita the Euros are more generous. Interesting to see the top three recipients of American ODA are Eqypt, Russia and Israel.
Depends on the country and depends on the stats.
Just use official sanctioned money and yes the US looks stingy.
Include the private sector and unsolicitied Government funds and the US is about average per capita with Europe.
Egypt and Isreal - Mid-east peace......
Russia - Largest emerging Democracy.
Crumpp
-
Are we stipulating no other nation has private sector and unsolicited government funds?
-
Of course not. However you can bet the largest free market in the world will have the largest private sector donations. Simply more fish in the barrel. Our lower tax base encourages private donations.
Due to our legal system/economy many of the worlds leading aid organizations were founded and are heaquartered in the United States as well.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by cpxxx
All this absurd chest beating while 120,000+ corpses lie rotting and millions are on the verge of starvation.
Hey you just gave me an idea!
Lets send em BBQ's!
:D
-
It may be true about more private donations, but it also may not be true. I don't think we have the data. The data on ODA contribution certainly goes against what I thought the data would be.
One thing the data is available on, is that the EU barrel (a free market) is now roughly the same size as the U.S. market barrel.
-
http://www.techcentralstation.com/082102N.html
Read it.
This is who wrote it:
http://www.techcentralstation.com/bioadelmancarol.html
As she says, STFU with your guilt fest.
Our system for Foreign Aid follows our Cultural norms. Americans have and always will be distrustful of Government. Unlike the rest of the world, private donations are the primary means Americans help others in the world. Our private donations are many times greater than most countries whose principal means is Government Aid.
Don't like it, immigrate to the US, become a citizen, and vote for a representative who will change it. Even run for office yourself.
With this level of research I have no doubt your upcoming book will state the 190 broke the sound barrier in 1941.
Nice Cheap shot. Not surprising, you almost always sink to this level when your losing.
Crumpp
-
why would anyone figure that a huge GNP meant that every single citizen was rich? socialist thinking at its utmost. I am constantly told here that we live in poverty so far as standard of living and now I am told that I am rich enough to pay the same as the rich socialist countries even tho I have no health care supposedly or any safety net..
lazs
-
How can she, you, or anyone reach any conclusions without the required statistical data? Where did the 40% claim come from Crumpp?
The same way you can whine about US Aid being stingy without including the private donations the US gives.
In other words you are simply going to reverse the arguement you laid on the United States. How does the position feel?
You do understand that sentence constitutes an insult to most other countries in the world. Seeing how you do not have ANY documentation to back up your claims I must conclude that you are full of chit.
Yes it certainly might. Just as the original comment inflamed the US. Hurts don't it?
Where did your 40% claim come from? Which part of your intestines?
From the sources listed. It's not my claim BTW, it's the News. We all know how accurate they are, I mean just look at all the great information that comes out about Iraq.
Let's check it out.
The United States OFFICIALLY gives at least by your OWN figures, 23 percent of the Worlds foreign Aid. With a private sector budget that is over double the official funds, it is not a big leap of logic to assume that is at least 20 percent of the worlds private funds given for foreign aid. We are the largest free market in the world after all. Add in unsolicited government funds and well that 40 percent seems conservative at best.
So I would say the reporter got this one right and 40 percent is a politically correct conservative figure. It certainly sounds better than HALF.
Crumpp
-
IIRC, the US also supplies about 60% of all world food aid.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
And this hate is based on the information you get from the lying bastards you call a media. You know, perhaps President Bush is not such a dummy after all for not reading newspapers.
LOL From what I have seen and to hear all the eurofolk talk your media isnt all that more honest.
They all spin it to get you to see things the way they want you to see it
-
Originally posted by Gixer
Before or after Bush started telling you that?
...-Gixer
Bush really hasnt told him anything
Actually you would be pretty hard pressed to find much in the way of anything Bush has said critical of the UN
-
why do people feel entitled to other peoples resources?
-
The intent is as if there is entitlement to what someone else has. When someone else does me a favor I'm grateful but do not act as if I had it coming. Thats all the difference to me. I have given tens of thousands in items and cash to people in the past but never to someone who thought they deserved it.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I don't think they do, but I think they feel they have the right to comment on other peoples spending of resources ... or lack thereof.
The US is going to end up spending more in money, military resources, food and development for the world than any other country by far.
I'm insulted that you would have the nerve to call the US stingy.
-
did you read the first post in this thread? I'm not sure how else I could interpret his position.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I'm sorry I've insulted you.
I'm sure you are.
But I also know that you realise that you are wrong. You can't possibly be so ignorant as to call the US stingy, after all my country does for the world's needy.
You foucs on GDP and try to say that's the end of the story and call us stingy when you know that it is misleading to focus on just that area.
-
You see I actually have documentation that supports my argument;
:rofl
I gave you the documentation. You ripped it from this site:
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs
Nice piece of fiction though.
It gives 23% of the foreign aid given by the limited number of nations in the following list:
Yeah. The 22 richest nations in the world.
When the world's governments met at the Earth summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, they adopted a programme for action under the auspices of the United Nations -- Agenda 21. Amongst other things, this included an Official Development Assistance (ODA) aid target of 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) for rich nations, roughly 22 members of the OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development), known as the Development Assistance Committee (DAC).
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#GovernmentsCuttingBackonPromisedResponsibilities
It is noteworthy however that two substantially smaller nations such as Japan and France together make up a larger percentage than the USA.
Guess we can just switch things around any old way to support your argument.
The argument was:
Is the United States Stingy?
Obviously not. We provide a disproportionate share of the world aid for ONE nation. At least 40 percent.
As you can see the list is rather limited so the percentage will naturally be somewhat lower if all contributing nations are accounted for.
Yes, which explains why that figure seemed so conservative. The United States probably provides closer to 50-60 percent of the aid in the 22 richest nations. Add in the rest of the world and it probably drops to 40 percent.
Regardless. The United States clearly provides the lions share of aid in the Western World.
Check this out while your riding that high horse....
Stop seeking to extend the WTO mandate to include new liberalising agreements on investment, competition, and government procurement.
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/what_we_do/issues/trade/bp22_eutrade.htm
Crumpp
-
How much does Asia help us out when we need it? I dont recall any reports of 25million dollars of asian funds coming in to rebuild the WTC, or for the kids who lost their parents. Or to rebuild California after the big Quake.
How much does America send out/spend in all humanitarian actions combined, and still the number of hungry and homeless americans grows every year. Yet so many hate us. I guess it's easier to hate us because we make success look so damn easy. It's not easy, we just try real hard.
Ignorance can be very expensive, so FYI, if your ever on a beach, and the WHOLE FREEKING OCEAN receeds out 100ft. or so, GET YER ARSE TO HIGH GROUND, ALL THAT WATER WILL BE BACK REAL SOON ..............DUH!
I'm so damn logical........
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Per capita is the most appropriate measurement IMHO. It shows how much each person is giving. You may give more as a nation, but when your nation is so much bigger it makes you all cheapskates. Percentage of GDP is also relevant since it given an indication of how much of your total wealth you share with the less fortunate.
The per capita percentage does not include private donations, which alone are massive.
And that's just the tip of the actual cost of the aid we deliver.
-
Per capita is the most appropriate measurement IMHO. It shows how much each person is giving.
In your opinion....
All measuring per capita does is show the US pays less in taxes. It does not include the percentage of income private individual donate to charity.
We pay less taxes and have more disposable income to donate. Hence our private contributions are much larger than the Government's official contributions.
Crumpp
-
You add the private contributions to your government contributions ... of course without doing the same for the other countries.
Read the articles.
They all agree. No other country comes close to the US for private donations.
Crumpp
-
Plus add in the costs of per capita on military spending into the equation.
The US rebuilt Europe, and Japan, invested billions to protect Europe from the USSR, bankrolled the IMF.
As a result, countries like Norway can now spend their money pulling oil out of the north sea ( with US help once again) and have people like yourself call the US stingy.
We pay over 50% of the entire UN's food aid budget PLUS give out our own direct food aid in the millions of tons.
We are also most capable of actually delivering the aid due to our military spending.
I refrain from ever bashing another country ( look that up if you want) yet you seem obsessed with criticizing the US......for what reason I have no idea.
I do know that you are wrong in calling the US stingy......and you know it.
-
And still the thread goes on.
:lol
...-Gixer
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Or you buy more expensive cars and houses, and consume more consumer products than all other countries in the world... why, I think we are on to something here. *duh*
Better than being on state paid welfare for at least 10 months.
Are you still sucking up resources and not working? Just curious, because you seem to be the ultimate hypocrite.
You bragged about being out of work, yet buying a new car ( IIRC) and living well.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Careful Nuke. Prolonged pulling of large numbers out of your bellybutton can be hazardous to your digestion.
Look up the food budget for the UN and who pays it. You don't believe me?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
You mean you actually did some research? Post your own sources thank you.
what's the point? You are not interested in finding the truth about US aid. You are happy to just criticize us for being stingy without actually researching anything that might make you look to be wrong on the subject.
Even without researching anything....just knowing basic history, it is highy ignorant to call the US stingy.
-
Originally posted by A_Clown
.
Ignorance can be very expensive, so FYI, if your ever on a beach, and the WHOLE FREEKING OCEAN receeds out 100ft. or so, GET YER ARSE TO HIGH GROUND, ALL THAT WATER WILL BE BACK REAL SOON ..............DUH!
I'm so damn logical........
Only if the trough hits first.
-
Of course Crumpp and yourself don't find anything either since all you come up with is conjecture. I don't think you know enough basic history if you come to that conclusion.
what a blatant Lie. Guess you don't remember this:
Originally posted by Crumpp
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap&int=50
Nice website but it does not show US official or private donations. In other words it is just great propaganda.
Now let's look at the actual VALUE of what the United States Government officially gives:
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp?so=d2003#oda
Only in ONE year has ONE country given more.
This does NOT include private US organizations.
Lets look at those, down at the bottom under "notes on private donations":
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs
Notice these numbers are in BILLIONS of US dollars. The benefits of a capitalistic economy and low taxes.
Add these numbers to the unsolicited funds and official funds and the US does provide the majority of western worlds foreign aid.
Crumpp
It is very easy to see that the United States gives a large chunk of the western worlds foreign aid. 40 percent ould be a conservative figure assuming every nation list private donations at least matched their official contributions.
Crumpp
-
Anybody here read Norman Spinrad?
It's scary, what he predicted for the US seems to be coming true...
-
Originally posted by lazs2
he never said America or the United States?
lazs
No he said most ritch countries [note countries and not country]
so all of you are angry because of fata morgana
but most funny is, that other people from other countries didnt start to cry because of that.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
15.79 billion is not 40% of the total 68.47 billion. It is 23%, and the US is still last on the list compared to GDP. That means that both your government and your population are the cheapest on that list. Perhaps compared "in capita" it looks better?
hey man we are not even on that list, im about to put my head into the sand for one night :D
-
Originally posted by GScholz
The article has been proven a falsification. However he did indeed call western nations stingy in general. All this is of course irrelevant to your position since Mr. Egeland is not a recipient of anyone's foreign aid.
hey GS... its pointless... that crying boy, with thumb in his mouth, probably never ever read Mr. England`s comments and he is too cool to read it, no matter that i posted it in past and pointed out on misinterpretation from some US media.
He will belive in that fata morgana, because he read it on some web page with american flag.
-
Originally posted by lada
hey GS... its pointless... that crying boy, with thumb in his mouth, probably never ever read Mr. England`s comments and he is too cool to read it, no matter that i posted it in past and pointed out on misinterpretation from some US media.
He will belive in that fata morgana, because he read it on some web page with american flag.
I assume you are refering to me and my beautiful, handsome and magnetic boyhood picture?
You reading skills must be close to zero. I have never mentioned Englands comments, the aricle or Engaland himself. In fact, I read that article on newsmax.com before it was posted here and I saw that he never mentioned the US......because I read the article.
The reason I am here defending the US is because Gsholz is the here calling the US stingy. That's what you don't get. How can anyone come here and call the US stingy and not be full of crap?
I'll not bash any country here, but I sure will defend against my country being bashed.
Lada, last time you called me on something, you looked pathetic because you never bothered to read what I had said. I guess you don't learn.
I did comment on the article, the part about taxes
-
No one is really bashing USA, nuke, about the AID you give. Only Bashing the fact that you bang your cheast so loudly about it.
And given you some facts to suck on, about other countries efforts as well.
Crabofix
bork
-
Originally posted by patrone
No one is really bashing USA, nuke, about the AID you give. Only Bashing the fact that you bang your cheast so loudly about it.
And given you some facts to suck on, about other countries efforts as well.
Crabofix
bork
Since I have been on this BB, I have never pounded my chest about the US, unless it was in response to some arse trying to stir up something.
For instance, in this thread, my initial comment was on Engalnd's arrogant comment that if western nations were taxed more, we could have more money for aid. I didn't pound my chest, I rediculed his idea for the joke it was.
I don't bash any country and I'm going to defend mine every time from people like GS who STILL insist that we are stingy, which anyone in their right mind knows is not true.
Lada.....that guy...I can't remember him contributing much thought other than being critical of the US chance he gets. He then calls people names when he can't make a valid point.
God I love this BB!
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I assume you are refering to me and my beautiful, handsome and magnetic boyhood picture?
You reading skills must be close to zero. I have never mentioned Englands comments, the aricle or Engaland himself. In fact, I read that article on newsmax.com before it was posted here and I saw that he never mentioned the US......because I read the article.
The reason I am here defending the US is because Gsholz is the here calling the US stingy. That's what you don't get. How can anyone come here and call the US stingy and not be full of crap?
I'll not bash any country here, but I sure will defend against my country being bashed.
Lada, last time you called me on something, you looked pathetic because you never bothered to read what I had said. I guess you don't learn.
I did comment on the article, the part about taxes
no i were not speakin about you.. i spoke about lazs... he was the one who were wondering if Mr. E. mentioned US or not.
but never mind :D
-
Originally posted by lada
no i were not speakin about you.. i spoke about lazs... he was the one who were wondering if Mr. E. mentioned US or not.
but never mind :D
Okay.
But even then Lada, Laz was just asking if it was true that England mentioned the US or not.
-
yes he did and i replied to him ... post whitch you quoted were fun for GS
-
No one is really bashing USA, nuke, about the AID you give. Only Bashing the fact that you bang your cheast so loudly about it.
Nobody was beating their chest about foreign aid. This was not an issue until some eurotard made it one.
hey GS... its pointless...
Yeah we are not gonna buy your Bull****!!
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I know ... but sometimes it's fun! :D
may be we could setup SM club overhere ....
hope that skuzzy will not close it :p
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Yeah we are not gonna buy your Bull****!!
Crumpp
ofcourse you are not goin gto be my ***** because you are not an ******
everybody know that you are ****** , so nobody realy trough that you could be my ****** ...... but you would be lovely *****
i hope to have dreams about you as my ******
Im sorry if you see to many of *******, but its night overhere, so we have plenty of ******.
g`night *******
i ******* you too !
-
Don't include me in any of your HOMO games!!
Gscholtz in leather....eeeeeeyuuukk!
:(
Crumpp
-
ok... so if he never mentioned the U.S. in being stingy then it is simply one more reason why I do not watch the news or read the paper except in time of events close to home or war. I have never seen an accurate paper... the BBC is wrong all the time and even its staounchest defenders will scream foul when it voices news they know is wrong... I have never been quoted accurately in the paper. I don't know of anyone who has... sometimes I think that they will change anything you say no matter what out of an "artistic" sense.
probly find out when this is all over that only about 2000 people were actually killed.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Don't include me in any of your HOMO games!!
Gscholtz in leather....eeeeeeyuuukk!
:(
Crumpp
eehmmmm chmmmmm ... eeeeeehm .... yuumii yyuuuummiiii
but it would be best if we could get some german boy in leather..... you know there is something about leather&germans :D
-
Originally posted by Furball
nilsen, what happened to the flowery hat avatar? :(
I'm missing that hat too.:D
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
U.N. official slams U.S. as 'stingy' over aid
By Bill Sammon
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The Bush administration yesterday pledged $15 million to Asian nations hit by a tsunami .....
But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
Entire article:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041228-122330-7268r.htm
No nation owes no other nation no aid.
But I am sure the families of 9\11 victims would not mind that some of moneys collected for them be sent over to tsunami survivors.
BTW, I don't remember if any part of those 9\11 charity moneys is left at that government-established doleing fund. Black holes of the Universe again?
-
I haven't followed this thread as I find the situation rather crass to be discussing country bashing over the tragedy from the tsunami. At least one of the repeated participants is no surprise to me. Vidkun's negativity asserts itself very well here.
I do have a question regarding this comparison. Since a fair number of the victims are of the muslim religion, how much of the aid is coming from islamic sources / countries? Is this another example of "western" countries coming to the aid of distressed muslims out of proportion to the aid supplied by fellow muslims?
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Plus add in the costs of per capita on military spending into the equation.
The US rebuilt Europe, and Japan, invested billions to protect Europe from the USSR, bankrolled the IMF.
....
:confused: Do you actually suggesting to include here the US funds wasted on arms race during Gorbachev presidency? Wake up ! What you waste when it's not needed does not make your own stupidity to be a charity.
-
He did not say, "The U.S. is stingy." He said, "The U.S. and other western nations are stingy..."
At the time he said it, yes, they were stingy. And today, look at how people are falling all over themselves to appear not to be stingy.
He succeeded in stirring the pot to get more aid to the victims.
-
ok.... so now we have rolex saying that that jan ahole DID say the U.S. was stingy.... He didn't say france and the other western countries was stingy or that england and the other western countries were stingy...
which is it?
lazs
-
Well it appears the Swedes were busy doing other things instead of dealing with the tsunami situation. WTF is boxer day anyhow???
link.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&e=6&u=/ap/20050103/ap_on_re_eu/tsunami_angry_swedes
-
Yes.
It will be delt with in time.
Crabofix
-
Typical of the michelle moorish types, per-capita or any other relevant barometric reading become the first casualty.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
WTF is boxer day anyhow???
Boxing Day is the day after Christmas, 26th of December.
Apparently it is the day on which you 'box up' unwanted gifts, hence Boxing Day, nothing at all to do with the toe to toe, get in the ring , type of Boxing.
-
...."stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised. ...
now we get to the nuts of it, It BS stealth anti-tax cut crap. :rolleyes:
Hay UN,, Eat ME.:aok